Annoying (not Big) Media Bias

[Skeptic]

Not a big thing. But an annoying one, in the wake of the Brown election.

Did you notice every time a Republican wins, it's all about anger, irrationality, getting-back-at so-and-so, etc. -- but when a Democrat wins, it's all about peace 'n' love 'n' hope 'n' change?

 

[332nd]

Not a big thing. But an annoying one, in the wake of the Brown election.

Did you notice every time a Republican wins, it's all about anger, irrationality, getting-back-at so-and-so, etc. -- but when a Democrat wins, it's all about peace 'n' love 'n' hope 'n' change?

Depends on which channel you're watching, station you're listening to, or newspaper/website you're reading.

ETA: Also, if you go too far left or right you windup hearing about how it's the end of America... Or the other party depending on who wins.

 

[kevinquinnyo]

Not a big thing. But an annoying one, in the wake of the Brown election.

Did you notice every time a Republican wins, it's all about anger, irrationality, getting-back-at so-and-so, etc. -- but when a Democrat wins, it's all about peace 'n' love 'n' hope 'n' change?

Yes.

 

[Skeptic]

Depends on which channel you're watching, station you're listening to, or newspaper/website you're reading.

ETA: Also, if you go too far left or right you windup hearing about how it's the end of America... Or the other party depending on who wins.

So far as I can tell, every election is the "end of America" according to some pundits. What annoys me is not that, so much, but the idiots who say it would be a wonderful thing.

 

[332nd]

So far as I can tell, every election is the "end of America" according to some pundits. What annoys me is not that, so much, but the idiots who say it would be a wonderful thing.

It annoys me to but I can't help but to find it somewhat fascinating in that those who see it as good either think that it would be a people helping people utopia or a sci-fi Mad Max type world where their super soldier skills gain them their own fiefdom and there is a lot of left right crossover.

 

[Dragoonster]

Not a big thing. But an annoying one, in the wake of the Brown election.

Did you notice every time a Republican wins, it's all about anger, irrationality, getting-back-at so-and-so, etc. -- but when a Democrat wins, it's all about peace 'n' love 'n' hope 'n' change?

Well the US is right-wing, both Democrats and Republicans. So I'd assume conservatives should be happier with the current state of things, while true liberals are pissed off at both parties. The Dems haven't represented them at all over the past 8 years, instead have either fallen in line with the right-wing, or in Obama and this Congress' case, continued some of the same "abuses" (in their minds) of FISA, rendition, Afghanistan, and so on.

Many liberals are angrier, not just at Republicans but at Democrats as well. I know true conservatives (or liberals who want fiscal responsibility like myself) are also angry at Republicans for over-spending, but on whole I think their views are being better represented by their nominal party. If a liberal sees a candidate like Obama who looks promising they'll attach themselves to the hope-change mantra because they want something other than the current spineless and corrupt Democrats to believe in. They/we are like starving animals who smell something on the wind and really want it to be yummy fresh meat. Then when we reach it we find it's rotten like all the rest and get jaded again.

That said I almost never watch the MSM anymore so might be missing your point. Looked to me like Brown was the better candidate and deserved to win.

 

[Magyar]

Not a big thing. But an annoying one, in the wake of the Brown election.

Did you notice every time a Republican wins, it's all about anger, irrationality, getting-back-at so-and-so, etc. -- but when a Democrat wins, it's all about peace 'n' love 'n' hope 'n' change?

I don't see this as a bias, I see it as reality.

The republican party is reactionary and conservative politics is reactionary. By it's very definition it's negative ( I am not talking about what the people who believe in it think)

I can't think of a SINGLE issue promoted, supported or endorsed by conservatives that in some significant way doesn't involve anger, irrationality, or getting back at so and so.

Can you?

 

[The Painter]

I can't think of a SINGLE issue promoted, supported or endorsed by conservatives that in some significant way doesn't involve anger, irrationality, or getting back at so and so.

Are you kidding me? Do remember how the Dems treated Bush? Like this, "involve anger, irrationality, or getting back at so and so." Get off your high horse. The Dems are just as bad.

 

[The Painter]

A day or two before the Brown election I was watching a news program ( I can't remember which one) and the newscaster/host said "Now for the crisis in Massachusetts". Crisis??? A little bias, maybe?

 

[Skeptic]

It annoys me to but I can't help but to find it somewhat fascinating in that those who see it as good either think that it would be a people helping people utopia or a sci-fi Mad Max type world where their super soldier skills gain them their own fiefdom and there is a lot of left right crossover.

These folks are usually either extreme-left folks who thinks that once the evil capitalist system collapses, the world will recognize their superior wisdom and intelligence and senisitivity and education and choose them to show them the way... or extreme right "survivalist" folks who dream of taking revenge of the world once the cops are gone.

Neither group, in real life, could manage for a week without running water or electricity, of course, or run a grocery store without bankrupting it, but hey, that is not relevant.

 

[Beerina]

Not a big thing. But an annoying one, in the wake of the Brown election.

Did you notice every time a Republican wins, it's all about anger, irrationality, getting-back-at so-and-so, etc. -- but when a Democrat wins, it's all about peace 'n' love 'n' hope 'n' change?

Not really. Although some around here feign that Obama was elected to get health care or (insert their pet project here) done, plenty of media, correctly, pointed out it was much more a vote for "he's not the Republican" as it was for "he's the health care guy", or, in this case, even "he's the first African American", a large, but probably still secondary effect.

 

[Ziggurat]

I can't think of a SINGLE issue promoted, supported or endorsed by conservatives that in some significant way doesn't involve anger, irrationality, or getting back at so and so.

I'm sure you can't. I'm just wondering why you take pride in your shortcomings.

 

[Brainster]

Both sides have a vested interest in convincing their base that the other side is not just mistaken on a few issues, but actively working to bring about Nazism or Communism. The MSM, being mostly liberal, reinforces that impression with regard to one of the two parties.

A lot of conservatives are pointing to this video where Jon Stewart does a pretty good job of dressing down Keith Olbermann for his mindless attacks on Scott Brown. But note as well that there's an undercurrent of "Well, you're right on that point, and you're right most of the time, it's just this one part, Keith, where you went a bit too far." In fact, Olbermann is just Glenn Beck with glasses and liberal fantasies instead of conservative ones.

With regard to the OP, I expect this year to play out politically the same as 1994, complete with MSM moaning about angry white males (the only minority in the country that it is politically correct to demean).

 

[tyr_13]

Not a big thing. But an annoying one, in the wake of the Brown election.

Did you notice every time a Republican wins, it's all about anger, irrationality, getting-back-at so-and-so, etc. -- but when a Democrat wins, it's all about peace 'n' love 'n' hope 'n' change?

Well the different bases are motivated by different appeals. Republicans tend to play to the fear, anger, tradition, types of 'irrationality' while the Democrats tend to play to the 'freedom', peace, hope and change, types of 'irrationality'. I can't say I fault the media for this.

I suppose the argument could be made that it's all playing to different types of fears, and exceptions abound of course.

 

[Cleon]

A lot of conservatives are pointing to this video where Jon Stewart does a pretty good job of dressing down Keith Olbermann for his mindless attacks on Scott Brown. But note as well that there's an undercurrent of "Well, you're right on that point, and you're right most of the time, it's just this one part, Keith, where you went a bit too far." In fact, Olbermann is just Glenn Beck with glasses and liberal fantasies instead of conservative ones.

Hrm. You must've watched a different segment. I saw Stewart's dressing-down of Olbermann, and the undercurrent I saw would be more accurately described as "you used to be intelligent, articulate, and made good points; now you're just blowing smoke and attacking people."

 

[Skeptic]

I can't think of a SINGLE issue promoted, supported or endorsed by conservatives that in some significant way doesn't involve anger, irrationality, or getting back at so and so.

Can you define what you mean by "in some way"? I can't think of a SINGLE issue promoted, supported, or endorsed by liberals that does not involved Kevin Bacon "in some way", but that's hardly a reason for the news media to come up with "Kevin Bacon issue rises again in latest liberal gathering".

 

[Ziggurat]

Hrm. You must've watched a different segment. I saw Stewart's dressing-down of Olbermann, and the undercurrent I saw would be more accurately described as "you used to be intelligent, articulate, and made good points; now you're just blowing smoke and attacking people."

I basically agree with your reading of the message of that bit, but Olbermann was never intelligent, what passed for "articulate" was merely pretension, and the only "good points" he ever made were ones his viewers agreed with. The only difference between now and before is that his pathetic mewling hatred is more transparent than it used to be.

 

[Ziggurat]

Democrats tend to play to the 'freedom'

The only issue that Democrats promote freedom more than Republicans is sexual freedoms (abortion, gay marriage). Free speech? Nope, they've got the hate speech thing going. Right to bear arms - do I even need to comment? Financial freedoms - who is the party of lower taxes and less regulation?

 

[Nova Land]

Did you notice every time a Republican wins, it's all about anger, irrationality, getting-back-at so-and-so, etc. -- but when a Democrat wins, it's all about peace 'n' love 'n' hope 'n' change?

No, I haven't noticed that. Perhaps you would like to set up a protocol by which we could test your claim, and see if this does indeed occur the way you think it does -- or if instead it is simply selective perception on your part.

Are you claiming that every time a Republican wins it is characterized by a significant percentage of the media as all about anger, irrationality, getting-back-at so-and-so, etc. (and not about peace 'n' love 'n' hope 'n' change), and that every time a Democrat wins it is characterized by a significant pecentage of the media as all about peace 'n' love 'n' hope 'n' change (and not about anger, irrationality, getting-back-at so-and-so, etc.)?

That should be fairly easy to test, if you can describe a bit more formally how we recognize when a story is or is not about anger etc. and how we recognize when a story is or is not about peace etc.

My suspicion is that you are more prone to notice stories in which Republican wins are characterized as being about negative feelings on the part of the voters (perhaps because you disagree with these stories, and thus have a stronger reaction to them) and not to notice stories in which Republican wins are characterized as being about a positive feelings on the part of the voters (possibly because you agree with these stories, and thus take them for granted). Similarly, I suspect you tend not to notice the stories in which Democratic wins are characterized as being about negative feelings on the part of the voters, and to be more likely to notice stories in which Democratic wins are characterized as being about positive feelings on the part of the voters.

Oddly, I've noticed much the reverse situation among some Democratic-leaning folks, who are equally sure that the media always characterizes Republican wins positively but always characterize Democratic wins negatively.

We ask people making paranormal claims to specify clearly what it is they are claiming, and to suggest a fair protocol for testing the claim. As skeptics, we should do the same in regard to people making political claims.

Many dowsers appear to be sincere in their belief that they are able to detect water with their rods. Similarly, I suspect you are sincere in your belief that the media almost always portrays Republican wins as the result of negative feelings and Democratic wins as the result of positive feelings. But just as a dowser's ability to detect water tends to fail once a fair protocol is established and testing is carried out, I suspect your ability to detect significant differential media treatment in this regard will fail if you establish a fair protocol and apply it to news reports.

 

[DavidJames]

Not a big thing. But an annoying one, in the wake of the Brown election.

Did you notice every time a Republican wins, it's all about anger, irrationality, getting-back-at so-and-so, etc. -- but when a Democrat wins, it's all about peace 'n' love 'n' hope 'n' change?

No