One of Maryland's most outspoken, hyperconservative, far-rightwing blogs is melting down day by day as its hopes for a Palin takeover of America fade away. They also take their ire out on Congressional Candidate Frank Kratovil and are freaking out because his own party is now throwing money his way. That's what parties do! Of course this blogger did not seem to mind that other outside groups sent money in to Andy Harris. In any event....they are now taking just about every newspaper in the district to task for either endorsing Kratovil or for otherwise not helping, liking or praising Andy Harris..or running ads against him (well..that's what newspapers do--they accept ads...). Is this just a case of a blogger hating the mainstream media? Or does this blogger hate mainstream views? I think that's it.
BUT GET THIS....THIS ONE MADE ME LAUGH SO HARD I ALMOST LOST MY BREAKFAST....They are angry that our own local newspaper endorsed Kratovil instead of Harris and here is what they had to say:
The Annapolis Capital - another bastion of mainstream views.
Is that not wacky? A BASTION of mainstream views...ooohhhhh....hey pal, that pretty much is what media are in this country. We could call your blog a bastion of hyperconservative views...yes. That's why you exist. So what? But to bash a mainstream, corporate, mass circulation, daily newspaper and for being mainstream is just..well where do I begin to explain? A Bastion!!! That's like calling the military a bastion of soldiers or the teacher's union a bastion of educators...All such statements do is further cement in the minds of thinking individuals that blogs such as yours are nothing more than BASTIONS of rightwingnuts.
The Annapolis Capital - another bastion of mainstream views.
I love it. I gotta go for a walk.....
Please send comments,subscribe,share with your friends,and support our sponsors. Join us at Ahh Coffee almost every Thursday from 8-9 am.
Bay Daily on Hiatus
-
Congratulations to Bay Daily creator, Tom Pelton, who has accepted a
position with another organization working to make the world a better
place. In his ab...
9 years ago
6 Comments:
In a recent post, you lambasted Fox News for being completely bias, with respect to the election.
According to the non-partisan Pew Research Center, the factual statistics are as follows:
MSNBC
Negative McCain reports 73%
Negative O'Bama reports 14%
Fox News
Negative McCain reports 40%
Negative O'Bama reports 40%
I look forward to a retraction in your "hyperinaccurate" assessment of Fox News.
I also look forward to your post on the bias documented by the Pew Research Center, as it exists with ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, The New York Times, et. al.
Bob McWilliams
Bob--So even though you seem to get angry and react to everything I write, you're still reading CP? Some people just can't seem to get enough. I am happy to make your day and will be equally happy to do a full and exhaustive analysis of the issue as you request...if you pay me. What do you think I am-a one person Rand Corporation? Why don't you write about it?
Okay, where to begin?
First of all, I ask you to read my comments on "The Shape of Things to Come" (Oct 22). Then, I suggest you really do your research and see all the various surveys Pew has done over the years which have included Fox reporting and viewers. In a number of these surveys, Fox viewers have tended to be less knowledgeable about issues than are readers and viewers of many other news media, with a lot of "liberal" outlets at the top of the list. Also, if you look at their report from August 9, 2007 we learn some interesting facts.
For example:
"However, those who cite the Fox News Channel as their primary source of news stand out among the TV news audience for their negative evaluations of news organizations' practices. Fully 63% of Americans who count Fox as their main news source say news stories are often inaccurate – a view held by fewer than half of those who cite CNN (46%) or network news (41%) as their main source."
Hmmm...and...this:
"Similarly, Fox viewers are far more likely to say the press is too critical of America (52% vs. 36% of CNN viewers and 29% of network news viewers). And the Fox News Channel audience gives starkly lower ratings to network news programs and national newspapers such as the New York Times and Washington Post."
Okay, so Pew says Fox viewers not only know less than average, they are also more likely to believe the news media are biased than are average Americans.
Media analysis is subtle and complex and there are so many intervening variables and feedback loops and difficulties that it is very hard to draw clear conclusions. But since subtle and complex are not really your strong points, let's just say that we agree to disagree. I say Fox is unreliable and reflects a right-wing world view. You say otherwise, but Pew tends to agree with my assessment. That is the Pew Center you call non-partisan. So, which one is it Bob?
Well that explains a thing or two eh?
Look Bob, go back and see the report on the election polls to which I was referring. It is pretty clear that FOX was waay out in right field on this one and tried to make a big deal about its one poll that somehow was the only one that said what it said in comparison to many other polls that said there was no "narrowing" of the race. That's what I pulled out. That's what I wrote about. You want to go writing an exegesis or series of missives about media bias, go ahead, but there will be no retraction.
As for your MSNBC and FOX comparisons, if you read the full report, you'll see that Pew's conclusions are not as clear and cut and dry as are yours.
And finally, the issue which prompted you to write. When a blogger angrily attacks The Capital because it is "a bastion of mainstream views" it just made me wonder what the heck that blogger was thinking. Do you agree that The Capital reflects "mainstream views" and if it does, do you agree with that blogger that it is a bad thing?
Your conclusion that equates conservative views with stupidy is simply inaccurate. You obviously put me in that same category by noting that I am unable to understand the subtle and complex. Well, let's look at the actual PEW statistics.
Those who are ranked as having a high level of knowledge regarding the issues are as follows:
Daily Newspapers 43%
Network Evening News 38%
Fox News 35%
The O'Reily Show 51%
Rush Limbaugh 50%
Bloggers 37%
Comparing Fox at 35% and the Networks at 38% is hardly enough to warrant your sweeping indictment of the Fox News brain pan.
The free marketplace also makes a vote here. Network news viewership is in steady decline, newspapers like the New York Times on on the verge of going bankrupt, and MSNBC's rating are almost non-existent. Then, there's Air America - exactly where can I find them on my radio dial. Conversely, Fox has seen enormous growth.
Besides, last time I looked, your vote didn't count any more or any less than anyone else. Your analysis smacks of elitism.
Regardless of who wins this election, the real losers are the consumers of news. All Americans, Republicans and Democrats alike now overwhelmingly view the news as bias. The supposed firewall between opinion and news has not only been blurred, it's been obiterated. The coverage of this election has shown a shameful demise in objective reporting. Even Democrats now freely admit that news reporting contains a strong liberal bias. It got so bad on MSNBC that they had to drop Olbermann and Matthews from "news" coverage of the election.
No matter who holds political office, objective news reporting should be a sacred trust. As far as the American people are concerned, that trust has been lost.
Bob McWilliams
Bob
Really now. My "analysis smacks of elitism"? Why doth thou loveth to argueth so mucheth? I never equated conservative views with what you wrote as "stupidy" and any of my conservative friends would verbally berate you for saying such a thing about me--and them. All I did was show some of the Pew studies as they related to Fox. Neither one of us are looking at the entire range of studies. We are not in graduate school. If you like Fox and trust in Fox, that's your thing, but you still have not addressed my original point about their one poll concerning the race "narrowing" which was in juxtaposition to every other poll and news report I cam across. What say ye? How could Fox have been right and all the others off?
If the NYTimes is on the verge of going bankrupt it is more likely because of overall economic problems, but you are correct that newspapers and many traditional broadcasters are in decline. I also believe you are correct that media bias has been creeping upward and it is turning many of us off, however to conclude that news reporting contains a "strong liberal bias" is just too grand and sweeping of a generalization for me to take seriously.
As for the failure of Air America, that could be attributable to many factors and I never listened to it, but again, what is your point? You already showed how many media forums are struggling so what does the loss of Air America mean? Anyhow, host Al Franken has run a pretty good campaign for senate, has he not?
Again, did you look at my comments added to the post of 9-22 as I suggested? I will say it again--most mass media are centrist. They are owned by and operated as large corporations intent on gaining profit and market share.They reflect the values and employ large numbers of people who are "bought into" the system. And you have not yet responded to the fact that a popular and hyper-conservative MD blog attacked The Capital for its "mainstream views" when it endorsed Kratovil and not Harris. What did you think about that? Is our local paper "mainstream"? Is Kratovil "mainstream."? Is it wrong for a newspaper to be "mainstream" and finally, because I am a liberal arts graduate (and hold an MA in journalism) I like to wax eloquent from time to time. If you forget the normative role of news, or ignore hegemonic and critical theory ideologies, and all that other academic, scholarly and intellectual stuff we chew on along with our arugula while sipping latte, do we still not have to ask how media influences society and how society influences media? I mean, if The Capital is "mainstream" is that because it (the news media) makes society mainstream, or because the news media reflect mainstream society? Media theory and media criticism are like standing in between two mirrors. If the room is steamy, the reflections are clouded.
It's not as easy as you imply.
Finally, if I indeed thought that you and all conservatives are guilty of "stupidy" as you wrote, why would I bother responding to you? And if you really felt I called you that, why would you bother responding to me? Hah! Have we found some middle ground? You see, I never turned my back on the middle ground.
But Bob, the mere fact that you so intently read and then criticize CP tells me that you really do respect me, take me seriously and believe I am providing a forum and an outlet for community news and conversation. I appreciate that. However, you also pigeonhole me as some kind of ultra-left, close-minded, muddled-thinking, elitist. So which one is it Bob? And by the way, has there ever been anything I've written about with which you agree? You're basically an attack dog and while it is clear that you reflect and consider, you remain mired in your own self-made, distorted and constrained pit of negativism and hatred of anyone who disagrees with you--while claiming that is what I do. It's called projection.
I will again remind you-as I have before and to which you have never responded--that I offered you twice the opportunity to write a column here. You never responded. Air McWilliams?
There is nothing hateful, distorted or negative in my post. It is a simple statement of fact, based on research by respected sources.
If someone wants to read real hate speech, all they need to do is read any of your posts on Sarah Palin.
Bob McWilliams
Bob: Your comments will no longer be gaining any more amplification from this blog.
Post a Comment