Media Bias

Obama Tried To Delay Iraq Withdrawl

Tickler 2 Comments

Barack Obama has almost entirely escaped media scrutiny of his efforts to influence leaders in Iraq to delay scheduled troop withdrawals until after the election. I don’t think I need to tell you why he would do something so crooked and frankly disingenuous to the American people and their soldiers for political gain. This slippery weasel is truly the opportunist we all know he is.

WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

“He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington,” Zebari said in an interview.

Read The Article Here

The Opacity of Vinegar

Tickler Leave a comment

I think it’s official. Obama has passed beyond worried and has entered the bitter angry stage of his campaign’s slowing train. While addressing the issue of his lipstick-pig comment (and whether that comment was intended or not we don’t know), Obama showed the strongest signs yet of his frustration and surprise to see his lead evaporate.

If he had smart handlers, they would have told him to address the issue very lightly and playfully beg forgiveness, then move on. Instead he sat on the subject and stewed about the need to address his comment and how McCain and the press are combining to attack him. Barry, the last thing you get to complain about is why your cheerleading squad has taken a five minute break from their persistent chanting over broadcast and cable. No one’s gotten more love and protection from the press than you. And you can’t have it both ways, denying the horse you came on, and then looking in its mouth.

What a baby.

The Diligent: Preserving Ground Zero

Tickler Leave a comment

Two of the 9/11 victim family members fighting the liberal bureaucracy of NYC for the 9/11 Memorial were interviewed by a NY Times reporter (the reporter clearly being careful in this case because of the personal and touchy subject).

Part 1 Here

Part 2 Here

An interesting moment to me was when one of the women representing the families commented on thinking that the NYC government would do the right thing, regardless of politics and other problems…

“At that time I didn’t think it would take so long to do the right thing… they’re going to understand the importance of this space, and the lives that were lost in this space, and the sacred and hallowedness of it. How can you not?”

The reporter pauses and thinks carefully how to frame the question she knows the liberals want to ask…

“There are people who say, [pause] that’s a little too intense. What drives you like that? You know, who do you represent? How do you answer the people who ask those kinds of questions?”

Must be people like the reporter, for her to have even considered asking that question. A little too intense? Yeah, let’s bury our liberal heads in the sand and forget 9/11 happened? Maybe the mean Muslims will hate us less if we just forget about 3000 dead and make it go away. The woman either didn’t realize the reporter was questioning her motivations, or decided to brush it off. She answered, essentially, a different question and moved on. But this is the classic subtle and careful craftiness of the liberals in the press. They steer and craft and mold a interview or story into something that seems innocuous but even slightly forwards their agenda, even subconsciously. The right in the press do it too, but their numbers are far fewer and they call themselves commentators much more consistently.

What we should all understand as we watch TV, or read newpapers (while they last), is that humans write the stories. And as long as humans write the stories, there will be spin. Period. Once you establish that, you have to figure out who’s spinning for whom and for which worldview, to even know what to make of the content. It’s too much work to have to second guess reporters all of the time.

I wish it was a by-line requirement, to establish your personal slant and angle of it. As much as I would like to deliver a neutral report in the interests of impartial journalism, if I were a reporter I know that the nature and subject matter of my reporting would be flavored with my worldview. It’s unavoidable. I’ve never heard a neutral report. Not once. It’s not hard to read and watch news and see the slant, left or right, clear as day. It’s human to slant. It means you care about it. It means you aren’t a machine. The problem is when reporters have a slant and try to hide it. They realize that an obvious slant will weaken the desired perception of impartiality, so they practice the subtle lean — an almost inperceptable tilt that seems reasonable and harmless but in the end leaves readers/viewers with the opposite worldview feeling strangely icky.

I believe some of the younger and more naive reporters actually believe that they can change the world by forwarding the liberal agenda through the press. There is a lot of preaching by liberal professors and others on college campuses about “making a difference” by controlling the language and thoughts of the masses. The best ways to do this is by choosing politics or “journalism” as a focus and career path. Unfortunately for this country, the conservative students, coping with little or none of the “I’m a misfit and I want to be heard” mentality, instead choose to go into private business and build the country. This is a blessing for the country, but also the curse that brought about the liberal dominance in the media now.

Anyway…

Bias of Leftist “Journalists” Measured in Clear Terms: Cash

Tickler Leave a comment

Good article on IBD, entitled “Putting Money Where Mouths Are: Media Donations Favor Dems 100-1“.

The left apologist bias in the mainstream media is not news. We all know this. But at the same time, we’re surprised that they would let such easily quantifiable a metric as contributions tell the same tale in plain numbers that their “journalism” does in a far more foggy and sinister way on air.

An analysis of federal records shows that the amount of money journalists contributed so far this election cycle favors Democrats by a 15:1 ratio over Republicans, with $225,563 going to Democrats, only $16,298 to Republicans .

Two-hundred thirty-five journalists donated to Democrats, just 20 gave to Republicans — a margin greater than 10-to-1. An even greater disparity, 20-to-1, exists between the number of journalists who donated to Barack Obama and John McCain.

Searches for other newsroom categories (reporters, correspondents, news editors, anchors, newspaper editors and publishers) produces 311 donors to Democrats to 30 donors to Republicans, a ratio of just over 10-to-1. In terms of money, $279,266 went to Dems, $20,709 to Republicans, a 14-to-1 ratio.

Again, no surprises, but yet another pleasant confirmation.

In with Men’s Vogue and Best Life, out with Portfolio, Esquire, GQ

Tickler Leave a comment

I just cancelled my subscription to Conde Nast Portfolio (a new business/financial magazine I decided to give a try). Much as I tried to give them 5-6 issues of the benefit of doubt, I couldn’t find more than one or two reasonable capitalist representations — awww, come on, who’d want that in a business/financial magazine? — between the rampant socialist (er, uh, progressive) world view writing that litters the filler folded neatly within the glossy cover. The best I can say for Portfolio in print is, nice graphic design. That said, I’ve found the online version to actually contain some balance, so far. Doesn’t mean I’ll make it daily, or even weekly reading, since the agenda seems to be set from the upper offices and is sure to filter down at some point. Clearly against the level-headed and mostly reasonable financial publications, Conde Nast saw a possibly under-served market in the knowingly undeserving white-guilt democrats in finance (read Jamie Dimon of JPMC and the like), and jumped on it. As an aside, I can never wrap my head around how even the worse white-guilt could sway those who see how the economy works or doesn’t day in and day out. Like a wise man I know always says, there’s a butt for every seat.

I’ve also recently canceled my subscriptions to GQ and Esquire, two magazines that have taken such a blatant and frankly militant dive to the Left, and pushing that agenda, that I don’t even recognize them anymore. As for GQ, only Glen O’Brien remains the bright shining light, but his column isn’t political so it’s hard to go wrong. As an aside, I find it interesting that in 25 years of reading his solutions to our sartorial conundrums, I’ve disagreed with his advice maybe twice. Thanks Glen. Pick up GQ on the newsstand, read The Style Guy column and put it down. GQ went away in the early 1990’s from where I sit.

Men’s Vogue and Best Life are my new straight guy’s style and culture mags (though I’ve already noticed the odd emasculating article starting to surface here and there in Best Life). Men’s Vogue is surprisingly reminiscent of the golden age of GQ back in the 80’s, before they decided that staff metro-sexuals should expand beyond fashion and also run editorial. Growing up in a relatively small town, I loved to read about the far-away places and things that I became determined to grow up and travel to and do, which I have done and more, all mingled with pages and pages of style ideas and great classic graphic design (as opposed to the schizophrenic Wired-wanna-be of late years). Men’s Vogue has all of the old good, with none of the new bad. The random timeless accoutrements that are reviewed in reverence return me to the wide-eyed early materialist dreamer of my childhood, and gadget/destination collector that I am today.

I mourn the passing of the previously classic men’s magazines, but while there remains a market of guys like me to satisfy, I have hope for the future. Men’s Vogue and Best Life are a good start of the revival.