dorbie 0 #1 May 29, 2005 http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20050527-090415-8402r.htm Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #2 May 29, 2005 So, um . . . The Washington Times . . . had a column on media bias? BWAHAHAHA Dorbie, you need to take a cursory look at The Washington Tiimes, it's owner and how it is regarded in the world of news. Lemme help you out; http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&c2coff=1&client=safari&rls=en&q=Moon+Washington+Timesquade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ViperPilot 0 #3 May 29, 2005 If you want completely unbiased news, look no further than the Wash Times! Yeah.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dorbie 0 #4 May 29, 2005 I'll take it over CBS. It seems that every media outlet that doesn't dance to your tune is the target of ridicule. As long as there's the appearance of propriety you have no problem calling a biased blowhard like Rather a neutral source of news for a few decades. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dorbie 0 #5 May 29, 2005 I don't judge a piece of writing by the publication it's in. I judge it based on the contents of the article, you'd be well served to try the same approach. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #6 May 29, 2005 QuoteSo, um . . . The Washington Times . . . had a column on media bias? BWAHAHAHA Dorbie, you need to take a cursory look at The Washington Tiimes, it's owner and how it is regarded in the world of news. Lemme help you out; http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&c2coff=1&client=safari&rls=en&q=Moon+Washington+Times Okay, tell me what part of the Washting Times column was slanted, biased or unfactual in its report of the facts or consequences.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites swedishcelt 0 #7 May 29, 2005 QuoteQuoteSo, um . . . The Washington Times . . . had a column on media bias? BWAHAHAHA Dorbie, you need to take a cursory look at The Washington Tiimes, it's owner and how it is regarded in the world of news. Lemme help you out; http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&c2coff=1&client=safari&rls=en&q=Moon+Washington+Times Okay, tell me what part of the Washting Times column was slanted, biased or unfactual in its report of the facts or consequences.Just because they say they are against bias doesn't mean they practice what they preach. This article is hypocrisy in that they are obviously serving their own secret agenda. This isn't unusual and with research one finds this is true about most news and media organizations. This doesn't IMO make them stand out as special or worse than other newspapers or in general the media. I think they all have agendas and feed their own management and patronage bias'. In a perfect world afterall, all news would simply print the uninteresting facts and undisputed truth. How fun would that be? How many papers would that sell? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,175 #8 May 29, 2005 Quotehttp://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20050527-090415-8402r.htm It's biased!... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #9 May 29, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteSo, um . . . The Washington Times . . . had a column on media bias? BWAHAHAHA Dorbie, you need to take a cursory look at The Washington Tiimes, it's owner and how it is regarded in the world of news. Lemme help you out; http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&c2coff=1&client=safari&rls=en&q=Moon+Washington+Times Okay, tell me what part of the Washting Times column was slanted, biased or unfactual in its report of the facts or consequences.Just because they say they are against bias doesn't mean they practice what they preach. This article is hypocrisy in that they are obviously serving their own secret agenda. This isn't unusual and with research one finds this is true about most news and media organizations. This doesn't IMO make them stand out as special or worse than other newspapers or in general the media. I think they all have agendas and feed their own management and patronage bias'. In a perfect world afterall, all news would simply print the uninteresting facts and undisputed truth. How fun would that be? How many papers would that sell? Again I ask, what part of this Washington Times column is slanted or unfactual in its summary of events? Obviously the commentary is opinionated, but the summary of what it's discussing, and the affects are spot-on in my opinion.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #10 May 29, 2005 QuoteAgain I ask, what part of this Washington Times column is slanted or unfactual in its summary of events? Obviously the commentary is opinionated, but the summary of what it's discussing, and the affects are spot-on in my opinion. First of all, it's almost completely unfactual as it rarely states facts, mostly just the opinions of the author. To wit; Quote A fire-breathing Rush Limbaugh or snapping Bill O'Reilly might not receive many honorary doctorates, speak at Ivy League commencements or carry off the Peabody Award. Yet they come off as no more opinionated than an anointed Peter Jennings or insider Bill Moyers -- and a lot more honest about their own politics and the medium in which they work. That's a dubious fact followed by an opinion and quite a biased opinion at that. However, my issue isn't so much this particular artical, but the stated goal of the owner of The Washington Times, SUN MYUNG MOON; http://unification.net.master.com/texis/master/search/?q=%22washington+times%22&xsubmit=Search%3A&s=SS His "goal" in a nutshell is to use the paper to promote a consevrative agenda. He actually says it. Quotehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Times It is hilarious that they would publish a piece about media bias.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dorbie 0 #11 May 30, 2005 Quote However, my issue isn't so much this particular artical, Then start your own thread instead of ridiculing a reasonable observation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #12 May 30, 2005 QuoteQuoteAgain I ask, what part of this Washington Times column is slanted or unfactual in its summary of events? Obviously the commentary is opinionated, but the summary of what it's discussing, and the affects are spot-on in my opinion. First of all, it's almost completely unfactual as it rarely states facts, mostly just the opinions of the author. I'm talking about these statements: QuoteThe counterfeit documents Mr. Rather circulated undercut a sitting commander-in-chief in the midst of a national election. QuoteThe Newsweek article questioned the ethics and sense of the US military. The rest of the column discusses these around these two statements almost entirely. Nevermind the consequences of these actions. To say that these media organizations didn't consider the ramifications of their actions is almost unthinkable...almost...So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
dorbie 0 #5 May 29, 2005 I don't judge a piece of writing by the publication it's in. I judge it based on the contents of the article, you'd be well served to try the same approach. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #6 May 29, 2005 QuoteSo, um . . . The Washington Times . . . had a column on media bias? BWAHAHAHA Dorbie, you need to take a cursory look at The Washington Tiimes, it's owner and how it is regarded in the world of news. Lemme help you out; http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&c2coff=1&client=safari&rls=en&q=Moon+Washington+Times Okay, tell me what part of the Washting Times column was slanted, biased or unfactual in its report of the facts or consequences.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
swedishcelt 0 #7 May 29, 2005 QuoteQuoteSo, um . . . The Washington Times . . . had a column on media bias? BWAHAHAHA Dorbie, you need to take a cursory look at The Washington Tiimes, it's owner and how it is regarded in the world of news. Lemme help you out; http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&c2coff=1&client=safari&rls=en&q=Moon+Washington+Times Okay, tell me what part of the Washting Times column was slanted, biased or unfactual in its report of the facts or consequences.Just because they say they are against bias doesn't mean they practice what they preach. This article is hypocrisy in that they are obviously serving their own secret agenda. This isn't unusual and with research one finds this is true about most news and media organizations. This doesn't IMO make them stand out as special or worse than other newspapers or in general the media. I think they all have agendas and feed their own management and patronage bias'. In a perfect world afterall, all news would simply print the uninteresting facts and undisputed truth. How fun would that be? How many papers would that sell? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,175 #8 May 29, 2005 Quotehttp://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20050527-090415-8402r.htm It's biased!... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #9 May 29, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteSo, um . . . The Washington Times . . . had a column on media bias? BWAHAHAHA Dorbie, you need to take a cursory look at The Washington Tiimes, it's owner and how it is regarded in the world of news. Lemme help you out; http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&c2coff=1&client=safari&rls=en&q=Moon+Washington+Times Okay, tell me what part of the Washting Times column was slanted, biased or unfactual in its report of the facts or consequences.Just because they say they are against bias doesn't mean they practice what they preach. This article is hypocrisy in that they are obviously serving their own secret agenda. This isn't unusual and with research one finds this is true about most news and media organizations. This doesn't IMO make them stand out as special or worse than other newspapers or in general the media. I think they all have agendas and feed their own management and patronage bias'. In a perfect world afterall, all news would simply print the uninteresting facts and undisputed truth. How fun would that be? How many papers would that sell? Again I ask, what part of this Washington Times column is slanted or unfactual in its summary of events? Obviously the commentary is opinionated, but the summary of what it's discussing, and the affects are spot-on in my opinion.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #10 May 29, 2005 QuoteAgain I ask, what part of this Washington Times column is slanted or unfactual in its summary of events? Obviously the commentary is opinionated, but the summary of what it's discussing, and the affects are spot-on in my opinion. First of all, it's almost completely unfactual as it rarely states facts, mostly just the opinions of the author. To wit; Quote A fire-breathing Rush Limbaugh or snapping Bill O'Reilly might not receive many honorary doctorates, speak at Ivy League commencements or carry off the Peabody Award. Yet they come off as no more opinionated than an anointed Peter Jennings or insider Bill Moyers -- and a lot more honest about their own politics and the medium in which they work. That's a dubious fact followed by an opinion and quite a biased opinion at that. However, my issue isn't so much this particular artical, but the stated goal of the owner of The Washington Times, SUN MYUNG MOON; http://unification.net.master.com/texis/master/search/?q=%22washington+times%22&xsubmit=Search%3A&s=SS His "goal" in a nutshell is to use the paper to promote a consevrative agenda. He actually says it. Quotehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Times It is hilarious that they would publish a piece about media bias.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dorbie 0 #11 May 30, 2005 Quote However, my issue isn't so much this particular artical, Then start your own thread instead of ridiculing a reasonable observation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #12 May 30, 2005 QuoteQuoteAgain I ask, what part of this Washington Times column is slanted or unfactual in its summary of events? Obviously the commentary is opinionated, but the summary of what it's discussing, and the affects are spot-on in my opinion. First of all, it's almost completely unfactual as it rarely states facts, mostly just the opinions of the author. I'm talking about these statements: QuoteThe counterfeit documents Mr. Rather circulated undercut a sitting commander-in-chief in the midst of a national election. QuoteThe Newsweek article questioned the ethics and sense of the US military. The rest of the column discusses these around these two statements almost entirely. Nevermind the consequences of these actions. To say that these media organizations didn't consider the ramifications of their actions is almost unthinkable...almost...So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
