[N_Fiddledog]

I first started to notice the issues of media bias and pushes for control of information in the internet age when I was into the file sharing debate in its early days. I notice now the media bias, then pushes for control thing is spreading.

It starts with media bias...

Media Bias in the American Political Campaign

That's the first stage.

Global Warming skepticism has already experienced the media bias stage. They are now entering the push for control of the information stage...

Push for controls over the information released by global warming skeptic bloggers

And if you didn't read the links, you don't know what I'm talking about in spite of presumptions to the contrary. That's my opinion.

[Zipperfish]

I certainly agree there's no such thing as objective reporting. And, as one wise person put it not too long ago, there's no disinterested observers anymore. So that means all new reports are necessarily slanted. but are they slanted one way?

A person who is right wing will see a perfectly "objective" news report as left wing. The further right they are, the more biased to the left the report will appear. The same holds true for the left. Call it Zip's Theory of Political Relativity. Now--how do you account for this natural inclination of people to "bias" things towards their own point of view when you are trying to 'objectively" assess the political leanings of a media outlet? Isn't it just as impossible to objectively define a media slant as it is to broadcast a perfectly objective news report?

It should be noted that, as far as editorial endorsemetns go, Obamam is far ahead of John McCain. However, is that bias? If the score is not exactly 50%/50% in any given contest, does that automatically mean bias is at play? In 2004, with Bush versus Kerry, newspaper endorcesmenets were 213 to 205 (51% to 49%) in Kerry's favour--fairly evenly matched. The popular vote was the popular vote in the election--Bush 50.73, Kerry 48.27).

from my point of view, I see Rush Limbaugh wiht the Number One rated radio show in hostory. Maybe to you he's a card-caryying hard-line commie, I don't know. But I see him as representing teh right wing. Same with talk radio here in BC--there's no shortage of angry white men fuming on the air waves.

In the recent Canadian election, the Globe and Mail, the National Post, teh Vancouver Sun and the Vancouver Province--all four of my city's major dailies--endorsed Stephen Harper. Where's the liberal bias?

And then there's the question: What can you really do about it anyway? Pass a law saying that all news reports must be filed wiht an equality and fairness ombudsman prior to printing?

[lynnefoster]

The media has lost credibility.

This is what the losers sound like and this is what the winners sound like !

The first article on media bias is hogwash. It's just somebody who is trying to blame the media for the positive press coverage that Obama got -as if he didn't deserve it !

[SprCForr]

A heads up to all:

Keep it inbounds.

Thanks.

Carry on.