| How fair is the media? [message #160027] |
Wed, 15 June 2005 12:28  |
 |
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
If any of you know, today Terri Schiavo's autopsy results were released. They conclude that she was blind, irreversibly brain damaged, and nothing to suggest that she wasn't in a persistent vegetative state. So what does the media say?
MSNBC: [Headline story]
CNN: [Headline story]
"Autopsy: Schiavo's brain half the normal size"
FOXNews: 3rd story, after "Australian Hostage Rescued" and "Home Investigated
'Date rape' drug possibly used on Holloway, sources say", with the story header of "No signs of abuse"
So who reported the actual story? Well, MSNBC did a good job of reporting the story, mainly quoting the doctors who carried out the autopsy. CNN actually did an uncharacteristically good job of writing a story, except for the second paragraph where they cast random doubt,
"But what caused her collapse 15 years earlier remained a mystery. The autopsy and post-mortem investigation found no proof that she had an eating disorder, as was suspected at the time, Pinellas-Pasco Medical Examiner Jon Thogmartin said."
without mentioning that the doctors who carried out the autopsy said no signs of physical harm were found, rejecting the idea of Michael Schiavo beating Schiavo into her state.
On to FOX News. I give them a C- for fairness. They did have actual quotes in their article, up until about 5 paragraphs where they switch to quoting the Schindlers and their lawyers about vaguely described "unanswered questions".
So who would you rather use as news?
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
| Re: How fair is the media? [message #160030 is a reply to message #160027] |
Wed, 15 June 2005 12:43  |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7429
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
I read it on CNN first since my RSS reader is set to watch CNN... I didn't really notice much difference in the articles. I am happy about the results of the report that she was in fact severely brain damaged.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
| Re: How fair is the media? [message #160039 is a reply to message #160027] |
Wed, 15 June 2005 13:16 |
|
Crimson
Messages: 7429
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
You say Fox is all biased, yet they're the only ones so far, that I've seen, to include a PDF of the autopsy, which I am reading now.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
| Re: How fair is the media? [message #160086 is a reply to message #160027] |
Wed, 15 June 2005 15:56 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Because about 5 FOX readers were actually interested in reading about the autopsy. They know their readers aren't going to try to educate themselves, so they can do that all they want. I bet tomorrow there will be almost nothing, if not nothing] linking to the Schiavo autopsy.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
| Re: How fair is the media? [message #160137 is a reply to message #160027] |
Wed, 15 June 2005 21:20 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
UPDATE
Already, the Schiavo autopsy release has moved to story #11 on FOXNews' site, after
1) Australian Hostage Released
2) Home Investigated
3) Pushing Privacy
4) Senate Holds Gitmo Hearing
5) Ariz. Harrier Crash Forces 1,300 to Evacuate
6) Courthouse Shootings Hostage Writing Book
7) Parents to Blame for Girl's Cancer, Doctor Says
 Discovery Back at Launch Pad
9) Opening Statements Heard in '64 Civil Rights Murders Trial
10) Official: Chemical Plant Protections Inadequate
11) Schiavo Autopsy Released
It's already the thirid headline on CNN, after
1) Real-life brothers in arms
2) Was race a factor in Aruba arrests?
3) Autopsy: No sign Schiavo was abused
It's already the 7th headling on MSNBC, after
1) Iraqi commander describes dramatic hostage rescue
2) Senators clash on Gitmo prisoners
3) Aruba teen suspect’s home searched
4) Michael ‘at peace,’ Jermaine says
5) House curtails Patriot Act provision | Vote
6) Cancer-stricken girl’s mom has change of heart
7) Schiavo autopsy backs husband | Video
Is the mainstream media still fair after it tries to cover up for loudmouth Republicans?
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: How fair is the media? [message #160147 is a reply to message #160027] |
Wed, 15 June 2005 22:14 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
The media is trying to crush the story into oblivion as fast as they can while still "reporting" it.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: How fair is the media? [message #160193 is a reply to message #160147] |
Wed, 15 June 2005 23:46 |
 |
Hydra
Messages: 827
Registered: September 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| SuperFlyingEngi wrote on Thu, 16 June 2005 01:14 |
The media is trying to crush the story into oblivion as fast as they can while still "reporting" it.
|
Yeah, and the New York Slimes didn't do the same thing yesterday and today.
Let's see, a memo linked Kofi Annan to a U.N. Oil-for-Food program contract awarded to the company that employs his son, and the Slimes decides to bury it on page 6.
Oil-for-Food scandal investigators later said they were "urgently" reviewing the new evidence. That's worthy of the front page, or at least the second page, isn't it? Not according to the New York Slimes, which put it on page 10.
Oh yeah, the Washington Post put the same story on page 12.
Yet, you consider the New York Slimes to be the pinnacle institution of American journalism.
Do you have any idea how ridiculous you sound? Did you even read your own post before you decided to start this thread?
So they put the Schiavo story eleven links down. Big fucking deal. You can still see it plain as day at first glance if you know how to read.
Here are the Slimes, though, burying an important development that has to do with the Oil-for-Food scandal under six and ten pages of crap before you ever get to it.
Why did you give the slimes a free ride and not Fox News?
Walter Keith Koester: September 22, 1962 - March 15, 2005
God be with you, Uncle Wally.
 (<---New(ish) Prayer Group Forums)
 (<---Archived Prayer Group Forums)
|
|
|
|
| Re: How fair is the media? [message #160248 is a reply to message #160027] |
Thu, 16 June 2005 07:53 |
 |
Goztow
Messages: 9738
Registered: March 2005
Location: Belgium
Karma: 13
|
General (5 Stars)
Goztoe |
|
|
Media just broadcast what gives them people that look. This story isn't number one intrest anymore for thepeople and surely not if the trueth is "boring" in the eyes of the allday man with the hat. So it's normal it ain't number one and they kinda turn the story into what people woul like to read. It's all about economy and that's a good thing if u think about it. It would be worse if it was all about politics (what the dude that made this thread pretends).
Economy advantages >>>>> politic advantages!
You can find me in The KOSs2 (TK2) discord while I'm playing. Feel free to come and say hi! TK2 discord
|
|
|
|
| Re: How fair is the media? [message #162235 is a reply to message #160147] |
Thu, 30 June 2005 21:02 |
|
|
| SuperFlyingEngi wrote on Thu, 16 June 2005 01:14 |
The media is trying to crush the story into oblivion as fast as they can while still "reporting" it.
|
News happens all the time, so I'm not surprised that Schiavo's story went down that WHOPPING 3 headlines (i.e. CNN). As far as I could tell, the whole thing blew over shortly after she died, as with most news items. New stuff happens, new controversies arise, new headlines are created.
So I agree with gbull on this one, the whole situation isn't out of the ordinary.
"God isn't on our side either, cuz he hates idiots also."
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: How fair is the media? [message #162246 is a reply to message #160027] |
Fri, 01 July 2005 07:44 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
That is the kind of nonsense story I would expect FOX to run to get away from actual issues like the Downing Street Hearings, or the Terri Schiavo autopsy which proves they were lying the whole time, or any major news that comes out of Iraq at all, excluding,
"Today 2 U.S. marines were killed in Iraq during their valiant fight against the terrorists who atttacked the world trade center on that fateful day of September the 11th. All Americans who support ending terror in the U.S. and abroad should rally behind the Iraq war or be court-marshalled for high treason."
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
