Buy WILLisms XML Feed Mar. 21, 2005 11:50 AM June 20, 2005 5:36 AM Oct. 31, 2005 12:41 AM Nov. 23, 2005 3:28 PM Nov. 30, 2005 1:33 PM May 12, 2006 6:15 PM Oct. 17, 2006 12:30 AM Dec. 13, 2006 1:01 PM Dec. 18, 2006 6:37 PM Dec. 21, 2006 12:31 PM Dec. 22, 2006 10:22 PM July 25, 2007 4:32 PM May 28, 2008 11:12 PM June 9, 2008 12:25 PM Blogroll Me! July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 March 13, 2008 Due: July 29, 2008 Mar. 14, 2006 Apr. 4, 2008 May 19, 2007 July 9, 2006 July 14, 2006 Powered by Movable Type 3.17 Site Design by Sekimori WILLisms.com June 2008 Book of the Month (certified classy): The WILLisms.com Gift Shop:
This Week's Carnival of Revolutions:
Carnival Home Base:
|
« Quotational Therapy: Part 108 -- Kinky Friedman & Texas Early Voting. | WILLisms.com | Quote Of The Day » Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 361 -- Our Partisan Media & Economic Coverage.This Is Stunning, Yet Not Surprising- All intellectually honest people will admit that our nation's establishment "big media" are decidedly liberal. If you meet someone who talks about the "rightwing media," you are dealing with a nut. At the same time, you'll meet otherwise smart people who honestly believe the "MSM" is doing a great job playing it right down the middle. They may even roll their eyes at the notion of a liberal media. The empirical evidence against the big networks is piling up. We're now beyond the point of debate; there's no question that the mainstream media are neither mainstream in their politics, nor reliable sources of factual information. Thank goodness for the Media Research Center's tireless work on this issue. Their latest study exposes the seething partisanship of major media coverage of the economy from August 1, 2005 to July 31, 2006. Here's what they found (.pdf): ![]() Reports Negatively Charged: More than twice as many stories and briefs focused on negative aspects of the economy (62 percent) compared to good news (31 percent). News broadcasts dwelled on one prospective cataclysm after another, yet each time the economy continued unfazed. There's no excuse for any of this, given the strength of the American economy of the past 40+ months. These so-called journalists might be able to get away with this sort of distortion if not for the sunshine pumping they did in the 1990s. From a previous MRC study: ![]() The American media are not objective. With 6.6 million new jobs over the past three years, a 4.6% unemployment rate, falling gas prices, historically low inflation, strong consumer confidence, and robust GDP growth, this tax-cut-fueled economy is fantastic. It's too bad the major "old media" organizations, which are struggling financially, can't see through their partisan glasses, or beyond their own dreary economic bubbles, and just report the news as it is (as it is = awesome).
Previous Trivia Tidbit: Bush Tax Cuts Versus Nuancy Pelosi-nomics. Posted by Will Franklin · 24 October 2006 01:48 PM CommentsThe normal excuse is that 'good news is no news.' But . . . I distinctly remember the media cheerleading and ballyhooing the economy during the Clinton years. As if Clinton had anything to do with it. The economy did well in spite of Clinton, not because of him. Posted by: Ken McCracken at October 24, 2006 03:51 PM Remember folks - to the left, the MSM are all Bush-pumping Republican shills. They're not objective enough. Regardless of the fact that they break 10-15 to 1 Democrat, on a personal voting basis. Posted by: Hoodlumman at October 24, 2006 05:23 PM unless your a socialist this isn't much of an economy. read adam smith, particularly the parts that describe the meanings of "wealth" and "nation" Posted by: lester at October 25, 2006 01:12 PM |