Reply With QuoteYou do realize that the Onion is a satirical magazine?Originally Posted by Brandon
Here you go to prove that the media is liberally biased:
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/media_having_trouble_finding_right?utm_source=a-section
(Taken from this morning's edition of the Onion)
WASHINGTON—More than a week after President Barack Obama's cold-blooded killing of a local couple, members of the American news media admitted Tuesday that they were still trying to find the best angle for covering the gruesome crime.
"I know there's a story in there somewhere," said Newsweek editor Jon Meacham, referring to Obama's home invasion and execution-style slaying of Jeff and Sue Finowicz on Apr. 8. "Right now though, it's probably best to just sit back and wait for more information to come in. After all, the only thing we know for sure is that our president senselessly murdered two unsuspecting Americans without emotion or hesitation."
Added Meacham, "It's not so cut and dried."
Enlarge Image Media Having Trouble
Associated Press reporters investigate any possible gym training regimens the president might have used to get into peak physical condition for the murders.
Since the killings took place, reporters across the country have struggled to come up with an appropriate take on the ruthless crime, with some wondering whether it warrants front-page coverage, and others questioning its relevance in a fast-changing media landscape.
"What exactly is the news hook here?" asked Rick Kaplan, executive producer of the CBS Evening News. "Is this an upbeat human-interest story about a 'day in the life' of a bloodthirsty president who likes to kill people? Or is it more of an examination of how Obama's unusual upbringing in Hawaii helped to shape the way he would one day viciously butcher two helpless citizens in their own home?"
"Or maybe the story is just that murder is cool now," Kaplan continued. "I don't know. There are a million different angles on this one."
So far, the president's double-homicide has not been covered by any major news outlets. The only two mentions of the heinous tragedy have been a 100-word blurb on the Associated Press wire and an obituary on page E7 of this week's edition of the Lake County Examiner.
While Obama has expressed no remorse for the grisly murders—point-blank shootings with an unregistered .38-caliber revolver—many journalists said it would be irresponsible for the press to sensationalize the story.
"There's been some debate around the office about whether we should report on this at all," Washington Post senior reporter Bill Tracy said while on assignment at a local dog show. "It's enough of a tragedy without the press jumping in and pointing fingers or, worse, exploiting the violence. Plus, we need to be sensitive to the victims' families at this time. Their loved ones were brutally, brutally murdered, after all."
Nevertheless, a small contingent of independent journalists has begun to express its disapproval and growing shock over the president's actions.
"I hate to rain on everyone's parade, but we are in the midst of an economic crisis here," political pundit Marcus Reid said. "Why was our president ritualistically dismembering the corpses of his prey when he should have been working on a new tax proposal for small businesses? I, for one, am outraged."
The New York Times newsroom is reportedly still undecided on whether or not to print a recent letter received from Obama, in which the president threatens to kill another helpless citizen every Tuesday and "fill [his] heavenly palace with slaves for the afterlife" unless the police "stop the darkness from screaming."
"President Obama's letter presents us with a classic journalistic quandary," executive editor Bill Keller said. "If we print it, then we're giving him control over the kinds of stories we choose to run. It would be an acknowledgment that we somehow give the nation's commander in chief special treatment."
Added Keller, "And that's just not how the press in this country works."
You do realize that the Onion is a satirical magazine?
Hillary will NEVER be President
Obama is a FORMER President
Joe Biden is in Scranton eating paste.
I do realize it's satirical, and I posted it here because I thought it was funny. Sorry for no smileys.
But this is EXACTLY the type of story that the conservatives on here would believe, which is very unfortunate.
OK.
Just when someone starts out a post with "Here you go to prove that the media is liberally biased".
One would expect a reference with a little more standing.
Kind of like sourcing Mad Magazine.
Hillary will NEVER be President
Obama is a FORMER President
Joe Biden is in Scranton eating paste.
When I saw that the thread was started by Brandon I had an idea to read carefully....
My take is that the media is NOT liberally biased, or this would be a real story.
For example, Obama got a new dog.
Unbiased Press: a 1 minute upbeat Report on the new dog, shows pictures of Obama taking the dog for a walk, and is generally a happy story.
Conservative-biased Press: Beats up Obama over the fact that the dog originally was named Charlie, is a 'Portuguese' dog instead of an 'American' dog, etc. etc.
Liberal-biased Press: Runs a heartwarming story that takes 15 minutes of the 30 minute newscast about how Obama and Bo are getting along and how much his kids and wife enjoy the dog so much.
So if the media were Liberally biased, they would've made up a story about Obama doing a home invasion and killing two people?
Time to take your meds, Brandon.
Since when does anyone believe that the main stream media is NOT biased. Just go pick up a Buffalo News newspaper, that liberal rag (added for emphasis). I could post stories from the Huffington post that would make as much sense as Brandon's fantasy story from the Onion. The difference is that the Onion does not try to hide the fact that it's stories are satirical. The Huffington post asserts that it's stories are fact.
**free is a trademark of the current U.S. government.
The Huffington post is liberally biased. What's news there? It's not the MAINSTREAM Press.
The same as Rush Limbaugh or Drudge asserts that it's stories are fact and not conservatively biased as well.
So you didn't watch CNN or MSNBC this morning did you?
"I know you guys enjoy reading my stuff because it all makes sense. "
Dumbest post ever! Thanks for the laugh PO!
You consider the examples you provided to be "media."
Rush Limbaugh and Drudge are the main stream media? As much as the Huff is. Let's see how the main stream media handles coverage of the Tea parties today. The real media will cover it, the rest will try to slant it in some way or another. Some will even vilify those that would attend these rallies in order to "protect" their savior.
Last edited by mikenold; April 15th, 2009 at 10:13 AM. Reason: content
**free is a trademark of the current U.S. government.
Yes, it's funny you don't.You consider the examples you provided to be "media."
Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly/Drudge/Coulter/Savage are all by definition, the media. If someone broadcasts on radio or tv, they are the 'media'.
The 'mainstream media' is CNN/MSNBC/FOX/ABC/NBC/CBS.
I consider them as nothing more than entertainment. I don't know of one person that relies on any of the above as a news source.
My definition of "media," in the context of which we are discussing, is journalism.
Have you watched the press fawn over the dog? Your above example has been happening for 2 or 3 days now.
They're jingling the shiny keys and the press is falling for it. The press (and the admin) would rather be talking about the Obama kids and their new dog than they would the economy, Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq (5 soldiers died the other day...not as big of a deal now as it was pre-election), etc
I've seen no less than 5 different MSM outlets show Obammy running that pooch since yesterday.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions