The Media Is So Gun Ignorant! (WOT-related)

[Nate]

I can't link to the photograph, because it was removed by the AFP, but here was the caption:


An elderly Iraqi woman shows two bullets which she says hit her house following an early coalition forces raid in the predominantly Shiite Baghdad suburb of Sadr City.(AFP/Wissam al-Okaili)

You can still see the accompanying image here:

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/08/15/credulous-photojournalism-of-the-day/

I didn't know that casings remained attached to bullets after they were fired :lame2:

Maybe one of our guys had a pop-no-kick and pulled the charging handle so hard that the bullet flew out of the ejection port, casing, bullet and all, and hit this woman's house :laugh2:

At least the woman in the picture had the decency to use what appear to be NATO rounds (just guessing - the cartridges appear to be brass cased - looks like 5.56 and 7.62 NATO). Would have been pretty funny if she'd used some steel-cased Russian/Chinese-made Warsaw Pact crap and claimed it was fired by Americans.

Fuck, man, reporters are idiots.

[Nukeman]

Fuck, man, reporters are idiots.

For this line alone I need to give you rep points......

[glockmail]

I can't link to the photograph, because it was removed by the AFP, but here was the caption:



You can still see the accompanying the image here:

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/08/15/credulous-photojournalism-of-the-day/

I didn't know that casings remained attached to bullets after they were fired :lame2:

Maybe one of our guys had a pop-no-kick and pulled the charging handle so hard that the bullet flew out of the ejection port, casing, bullet and all, and hit this woman's house :laugh2:

At least the woman in the picture had the decency to use what appear to be NATO rounds (just guessing - the cartridges appear to be brass cased - looks like 5.56 and 7.62 NATO). Would have been pretty funny if she'd used some steel-cased Russian/Chinese-made Warsaw Pact crap and claimed it was fired by Americans.

Fuck, man, reporters are idiots.

She looks like the same woman who the liberal media have been following around for years creating propaganda against the war. :laugh2:

[gabosaurus]

The responsibility of the media is to inform and protect the American people. Not to protect and cover up for the Executive branch or American military interests.

[glockmail]

The responsibility of the media is to inform and protect the American people. Not to protect and cover up for the Executive branch or American military interests. Irrelevant post. Completely.

[Kathianne]

Irrelevant post. Completely.

I must concur with you, which happens about every 5 'blue moons'. :laugh2: Looks like Gabby doesn't care if the msm is spoon feeding propaganda, as long as it isn't US propaganda.

[Gunny]

The responsibility of the media is to inform and protect the American people. Not to protect and cover up for the Executive branch or American military interests.

It is the responsibility of the media to check out the authenticity of what it is selling to us as "truth."

Anyone who has ever fired a weapon of knows anything about them knows the only way a bullet his your house with casing intact is if someone THROWS it.

[hjmick]

The responsibility of the media is to inform and protect the American people. Not to protect and cover up for the Executive branch or American military interests.

WTF?! Did you even click on the link? Look at the story and picture in question? It is the responsibility of the media to inform the American people...WITH THE FUCKING TRUTH! The only way those bullets could have possibly "hit her house" is if they were THROWN AT HER HOUSE!

Here, let me make it easier for you, I'll post the picture and caption from AFP:

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y113/hjmc3rd/lies.jpg

An elderly Iraqi woman shows two bullets which she says hit her house following an early coalition forces raid in the predominantly Shiite Baghdad suburb of Sadr City.

[hjmick]

I see some folks already hit the same notes I did. Sorry about that. I read gabosaurus' post and went straight to reply, skipped everything else.

[red states rule]

The responsibility of the media is to inform and protect the American people. Not to protect and cover up for the Executive branch or American military interests.

so publishing lies - lies they know are lies - is fullfilling that responsibility?

[red states rule]

the liberal media has shown its anti US military bias so many different times. The countless stories that have been proven to be false, fake photos, and allowing terrorists to take them on a tour of US inflicted damage

No wonder the public believes the MSM is slanted, biased, and unreliable

[Mr. P]

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y113/hjmc3rd/lies.jpg



I am 80% certain I saw this very same photo a couple yrs ago. Anyone else?
A propaganda file photo recycled?

[red states rule]

I am 80% certain I saw this very same photo a couple yrs ago. Anyone else?
A propaganda file photo recycled?

There have been many instances where the same photo has been used. Even dead people have been seen in mulitiple pics - and they are not dead in some of them

[Hagbard Celine]

I am 80% certain I saw this very same photo a couple yrs ago. Anyone else?
A propaganda file photo recycled?

It's probably a stock photo. They're used all the time, especially for Internet stories. The woman's house probably was hit by gun fire at some point and then posed for a picture with the bullets later-on or maybe while she was being interviewed. The pic was probably sent on the wire and then some schlub in some news bureau somewhere added the caption later. Are you guys really buying this as "evidence" of a vast liberal media conspiracy? :tinfoil:

Believe me, the media version of events is much more accurate than the one Washington feeds us. You guys seem to forget that the media is made-up of people. People make mistakes sometimes--this is a pretty stupid mistake, but it isn't indicative of the media as a whole. You think an imbeded journalist in Iraq wouldn't know the difference between a shell casing and an un-fired round?

[red states rule]

It's probably a stock photo. They're used all the time, especially for Internet stories. The woman's house probably was hit by gun fire at some point and then posed for a picture with the bullets later-on or maybe while she was being interviewed. The pic was probably sent on the wire and then some schlub in some news bureau somewhere added the caption later. Are you guys really buying this as "evidence" of a vast liberal media conspiracy? :tinfoil:

Believe me, the media version of events is much more accurate than the one Washington feeds us. You guys seem to forget that the media is made-up of people. People make mistakes sometimes--this is a pretty stupid mistake, but it isn't indicative of the media as a whole. You think an imbeded journalist in Iraq wouldn't know the difference between a shell casing and an un-fired round?


No, the media is made up of liberals who are biased in their views and allow that bias to influence what and how they report

CNN has the famous Michael Ware who is constantly injecting his personal views into his "news stories"

[Hagbard Celine]

No, the media is made up of liberals who are biased in their views and allow that bias to influence what and how they report

CNN has the famous Michael Ware who is constantly injecting his personal views into his "news stories"
So you're a copycat and a conspiracy theorist now?

[darin]

You guys seem to forget that the media is made-up of people. People make mistakes sometimes--this is a pretty stupid mistake, but it isn't indicative of the media as a whole. You think an imbeded journalist in Iraq wouldn't know the difference between a shell casing and an un-fired round?

...but when "the Media" continually makes 'mistakes' which are designed to sway public opinion, it's hard to believe they are mistakes. Most journalists are Left-wing hacks; who want try to cover op/ed as 'fact'. Tis why I prefer News which simply reports, then let's ME decide.

[Hagbard Celine]

...but when "the Media" continually makes 'mistakes' which are designed to sway public opinion, it's hard to believe they are mistakes. Most journalists are Left-wing hacks; who want try to cover op/ed as 'fact'. Tis why I prefer News which simply reports, then let's ME decide.

Fox News is just more obvious about their rightwing slant. CNN, MSNBC, Fox, they're all the same. They all get their stories from the AP and Reuters wires. The reason Fox has higher ratings than CNN is because they have a flashier package and they have much more punditry like Hannity & Colmes and BOR to grab people's attention with outrageous viewpoints. Here's an oversight website for good ol' Fox News. http://www.newshounds.com (http://www.newshounds.us/) If you have one for CNN, feel welcome to post it. I'll forward it to my superiors.

[theHawk]

I'm to the point where I can't stand to watch CNN anymore. I wish they'd can that walking corpse Larry King. He is the absolute worse interviewer I've ever seen. He sits there making weird old man sounds and constantly cuts off his guests. I also can't stand how they hype up their own reporters like Anderson Cooper, as if he were some sort of rock star. They are alot better at reporting the news than msnbc, but I found myself watching msnbc more because its so hilarious to see them be so blatantly anti-Bush. I do like Chris Tucker's show he actually conducts good interviews and doesn't interrupt guests like Hannity does.

[darin]

Fox News is just more obvious about their rightwing slant. CNN, MSNBC, Fox, they're all the same. They all get their stories from the AP and Reuters wires. The reason Fox has higher ratings than CNN is because they have a flashier package and they have much more punditry like Hannity & Colmes and BOR to grab people's attention with outrageous viewpoints. Here's an oversight website for good ol' Fox News. http://www.newshounds.com (http://www.newshounds.us/) If you have one for CNN, feel welcome to post it. I'll forward it to my superiors.

What YOU Call 'right wing' I call 'centrist' - you are so far left, most ANYTHING right of of that is 'right wing' to you.

[red states rule]

Fox News is just more obvious about their rightwing slant. CNN, MSNBC, Fox, they're all the same. They all get their stories from the AP and Reuters wires. The reason Fox has higher ratings than CNN is because they have a flashier package and they have much more punditry like Hannity & Colmes and BOR to grab people's attention with outrageous viewpoints. Here's an oversight website for good ol' Fox News. http://www.newshounds.com (http://www.newshounds.us/) If you have one for CNN, feel welcome to post it. I'll forward it to my superiors.

That is what the libs want people to think. the facts is Fox news have more libs on to give their opinions, then the number of republicnas CNN and MSNBC have on COMBINED

[Gaffer]

I am 80% certain I saw this very same photo a couple yrs ago. Anyone else?
A propaganda file photo recycled?

I think this is the same woman who was standing in front of what appeared to be a bombed out house during the Israeli hezbollah conflict. It was later revealed to be a cropped photo. The actual one showed a bull dozer tearing down an old building and workers standing around.

[glockmail]

It's probably a stock photo. They're used all the time, especially for Internet stories. The woman's house probably was hit by gun fire at some point and then posed for a picture with the bullets later-on or maybe while she was being interviewed. The pic was probably sent on the wire and then some schlub in some news bureau somewhere added the caption later. Are you guys really buying this as "evidence" of a vast liberal media conspiracy? :tinfoil:

....

I think she's the same woman caught doing similar propaganda here: http://www.zombietime.com/reuters_photo_fraud/
It's a big page, but scoll down about 1/3 way.

[red states rule]

I think this is the same woman who was standing in front of what appeared to be a bombed out house during the Israeli hezbollah conflict. It was later revealed to be a cropped photo. The actual one showed a bull dozer tearing down an old building and workers standing around.

and the liberal media knows it as well, yet the publish the photos and the stories - it fits their agenda that America is the real terrorist nation



I'm to the point where I can't stand to watch CNN anymore. I wish they'd can that walking corpse Larry King. He is the absolute worse interviewer I've ever seen. He sits there making weird old man sounds and constantly cuts off his guests. I also can't stand how they hype up their own reporters like Anderson Cooper, as if he were some sort of rock star. They are alot better at reporting the news than msnbc, but I found myself watching msnbc more because its so hilarious to see them be so blatantly anti-Bush. I do like Chris Tucker's show he actually conducts good interviews and doesn't interrupt guests like Hannity does.

You are not alone. The ratings tell the entrie story. CNN is way behind Fox News, and their liberal slant is the reason

[Gaffer]

It's probably a stock photo. They're used all the time, especially for Internet stories. The woman's house probably was hit by gun fire at some point and then posed for a picture with the bullets later-on or maybe while she was being interviewed. The pic was probably sent on the wire and then some schlub in some news bureau somewhere added the caption later. Are you guys really buying this as "evidence" of a vast liberal media conspiracy? :tinfoil:

Believe me, the media version of events is much more accurate than the one Washington feeds us. You guys seem to forget that the media is made-up of people. People make mistakes sometimes--this is a pretty stupid mistake, but it isn't indicative of the media as a whole. You think an imbeded journalist in Iraq wouldn't know the difference between a shell casing and an un-fired round?

If its not a vast media conspiracy its vast media incompetence on a grand scale.

[red states rule]

If its not a vast media conspiracy its vast media incompetence on a grand scale.

Here are more staged photos that the MSM ran with as fact

http://www.newsbusters.org/node/6995

[theHawk]

The pic was probably sent on the wire and then some schlub in some news bureau somewhere added the caption later. Are you guys really buying this as "evidence" of a vast liberal media conspiracy? :tinfoil:

No its not a conspiracy. There is nothing secretive about it at all. They are very open and blantant about promoting anti-US stories.

[red states rule]

No its not a conspiracy. There is nothing secretive about it at all. They are very open and blantant about promoting anti-US stories.

CNN ran sniper video of US troops being shot, and the NY Times ran a video on its web site of a US Marine dying

What more proof do you want the liberal media is rooting AGAINST the US in this fight?


Fox News is just more obvious about their rightwing slant. CNN, MSNBC, Fox, they're all the same. They all get their stories from the AP and Reuters wires. The reason Fox has higher ratings than CNN is because they have a flashier package and they have much more punditry like Hannity & Colmes and BOR to grab people's attention with outrageous viewpoints. Here's an oversight website for good ol' Fox News. http://www.newshounds.com (http://www.newshounds.us/) If you have one for CNN, feel welcome to post it. I'll forward it to my superiors.

We all know CNN is a liberal netowrk - now here is an example of MSNBC and their bias

MSNBC Newsroom Booed Bush State of the Union
By Mark Finkelstein | August 16, 2007 - 06:36 ET
UPDATE: Joe and Mika discuss this NB item. See below.

Joe Scarborough has pulled back the curtain on the liberal bias at MSNBC, describing an incident in which people in its newsroom ceaselessly booed President Bush during a State of the Union address.

The revelation came on "Morning Joe" today at 6:02 A.M. EDT. Joe was discussing a recent episode at the Seattle Times in which reporters and editors cheered the news that Karl Rove had resigned. Scarborough applauded Seattle Times Executive Editor Dave Boardman for issuing a memorandum reproving his colleagues. For more, read NB items by Brent Baker and Ken Shepherd.

Joe went on to describe a similar incident at MSNBC.

View video here. Note: that's newsreader Mika Brzezinksi heard murmuring in assent, though one has to wonder just how thrilled she was by Joe's candor in outing her fellow MSNBC liberals.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: There was a story out of Seattle, and the reason I love it is that it's transparency in the news. You have an editor who was actually outing his own people. The Seattle Times newsroom broke into applause when Karl Rove resigned. And of course that's bad. What I like about it is that the editor actually wrote about it and went in and told the people in the newsroom that was unacceptable.

And I've got to say, my first night here at MSNBC was the President's State of the Union address in 2003, and I was shocked because there were actually people in the newsroom that were booing the president actually from the beginning to the end. And I actually talked to [NBC/MSNBC executive] Phil Griffin about it, and he said "how was it last night?" Because he was the one that called me out of the Ace Hardware store, got my vest on. He said "how was it last night?" I said "well, it's OK, I understand it's a little bit different up here than it is down in northwest Florida, but you had people in the newsroom actively booing the President of the United States. Phil turned red very quickly. That didn't happen again.


Great news: the MSNBC newsroom no longer actively boos the President! But did Griffin replace any of the offenders and bring in professionals, or is MSNBC still staffed by people who simply do their booing on the inside -- and in the news choices they make?

for the complete article

http://media.newsbusters.org/stories/msnbc-newsroom-booed-bushs-state-union.html?q=blogs/mark-finkelstein/2007/08/16/msnbc-newsroom-booed-bushs-state-union

[darin]

...and yet these folk won't show the towers coming down, nor the pentagon attack. :-/

[red states rule]

...and yet these folk won't show the towers coming down, nor the pentagon attack. :-/

that would create anger toward the wrong people

[darin]

right - the Muslims who want to kill us.

[red states rule]

right - the Muslims who want to kill us.

to the liberal media, Pres Bush killed those troops, and he is to blame for 9-11

[Hagbard Celine]

CNN ran sniper video of US troops being shot, and the NY Times ran a video on its web site of a US Marine dying

What more proof do you want the liberal media is rooting AGAINST the US in this fight?



We all know CNN is a liberal netowrk - now here is an example of MSNBC and their bias

MSNBC Newsroom Booed Bush State of the Union
By Mark Finkelstein | August 16, 2007 - 06:36 ET
UPDATE: Joe and Mika discuss this NB item. See below.

Joe Scarborough has pulled back the curtain on the liberal bias at MSNBC, describing an incident in which people in its newsroom ceaselessly booed President Bush during a State of the Union address.

The revelation came on "Morning Joe" today at 6:02 A.M. EDT. Joe was discussing a recent episode at the Seattle Times in which reporters and editors cheered the news that Karl Rove had resigned. Scarborough applauded Seattle Times Executive Editor Dave Boardman for issuing a memorandum reproving his colleagues. For more, read NB items by Brent Baker and Ken Shepherd.

Joe went on to describe a similar incident at MSNBC.

View video here. Note: that's newsreader Mika Brzezinksi heard murmuring in assent, though one has to wonder just how thrilled she was by Joe's candor in outing her fellow MSNBC liberals.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: There was a story out of Seattle, and the reason I love it is that it's transparency in the news. You have an editor who was actually outing his own people. The Seattle Times newsroom broke into applause when Karl Rove resigned. And of course that's bad. What I like about it is that the editor actually wrote about it and went in and told the people in the newsroom that was unacceptable.

And I've got to say, my first night here at MSNBC was the President's State of the Union address in 2003, and I was shocked because there were actually people in the newsroom that were booing the president actually from the beginning to the end. And I actually talked to [NBC/MSNBC executive] Phil Griffin about it, and he said "how was it last night?" Because he was the one that called me out of the Ace Hardware store, got my vest on. He said "how was it last night?" I said "well, it's OK, I understand it's a little bit different up here than it is down in northwest Florida, but you had people in the newsroom actively booing the President of the United States. Phil turned red very quickly. That didn't happen again.


Great news: the MSNBC newsroom no longer actively boos the President! But did Griffin replace any of the offenders and bring in professionals, or is MSNBC still staffed by people who simply do their booing on the inside -- and in the news choices they make?

for the complete article

http://media.newsbusters.org/stories/msnbc-newsroom-booed-bushs-state-union.html?q=blogs/mark-finkelstein/2007/08/16/msnbc-newsroom-booed-bushs-state-union
How is showing footage of US troops being killed anti-US or anti-troops? Do you think this sort of thing should be censored from the public? If so, why? Isn't it in the public's interest to know what's happening to their fellow Americans in the armed services?

How does so-called "proof" of the ridiculous "vast liberal media conspiracy" on MSNBC equate to proof of CNN's "liberal bias?"

[red states rule]

How is showing footage of US troops being killed anti-US or anti-troops? Do you think this sort of thing should be censored from the public? If so, why? Isn't it in the public's interest to know what's happening to their fellow Americans in the armed services?

How does so-called "proof" of the ridiculous "vast liberal media conspiracy" on MSNBC equate to proof of CNN's "liberal bias?"

the ratings and polls show the viewers see the liberal media bias - and you clowns keep denying it

Then we have the report on who the "reporters" give money to

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113485/

No surprise, they give to Dems 9 - 1

[Hagbard Celine]

the ratings and polls show the viewers see the liberal media bias - and you clowns keep denying it

Would you mind answering the questions?

[red states rule]

Would you mind answering the questions?

the liberal media will show any story (real or not) that fits their aganda of the US losing the war. The liberal media is in bed with the Dems who want to surrender and leave Iraq defeated

Much like they did in Viet Nam

[red states rule]

Would you mind answering the questions?

No comment on who the "reporters" give money to?

[Hagbard Celine]

No comment on who the "reporters" give money to?

I asked you my questions first. That means you have to answer first. Either that or I'll start calling you "dodger" as well as copycat.

[red states rule]

I asked you my questions first. That means you have to answer first. Either that or I'll start calling you "dodger" as well as copycat.

I did answer them

Of cousre it is hard to work for CNN and still deny the liberal bias

Or having your war reporter admit drinking on the job

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2007/04/whats_wrong_wit.html


Where? You're full of sh*t.

post # 36

[Hagbard Celine]

the liberal media will show any story (real or not) that fits their aganda of the US losing the war. The liberal media is in bed with the Dems who want to surrender and leave Iraq defeated

Much like they did in Viet Nam

You're so retarded. You've said yourself that Fox News controls the lion share of the ratings market. That means most Americans watch Fox News. Yet you still accuse "The media" of being liberally biased. You're a f*cking imbecile. And I'm not the only one who thinks so.

[Hagbard Celine]

I did answer them



Where? You're full of sh*t.

[red states rule]

You're so retarded. You've said yourself that Fox News controls the lion share of the ratings market. That means most Americans watch Fox News. Yet you still accuse "The media" of being liberally biased. You're a f*cking imbecile. And I'm not the only one who thinks so.

So now Fox News "controls" the ratings market? Yes they are #1 for cable news networks - yet you still have the major networks, and the liberal print media

[Pale Rider]

I am 80% certain I saw this very same photo a couple yrs ago. Anyone else?
A propaganda file photo recycled?

No matter how you stack it, it's bullshit.

[red states rule]

No matter how you stack it, it's bullshit.

the liberal media no longer reports what happened - they report what they want to happen

and they will slant the news to fit that profile

[darin]

You're so retarded. You've said yourself that Fox News controls the lion share of the ratings market. That means most Americans watch Fox News. Yet you still accuse "The media" of being liberally biased. You're a f*cking imbecile. And I'm not the only one who thinks so.

If most americans get their news from Fox, it has NOTHING to do with "The Media" having a liberal bias. It's retarded to related the two. Fox is not "The Media" - it's just ONE organization, vastly outnumbered by Media hacks, such as a large portion of CNN, who are so blatantly biased against conservatism, and most republicans, an imbecile could see it.

[red states rule]

If most americans get their news from Fox, it has NOTHING to do with "The Media" having a liberal bias. It's retarded to related the two. Fox is not "The Media" - it's just ONE organization, vastly outnumbered by Media hacks, such as a large portion of CNN, who are so blatantly biased against conservatism, and most republicans, an imbecile could see it.

I notice he did not object when I posted that Fox news has twice the number of liberals on, giving their opinions, then the number of Republicans on CNN and MSNBC combined

Of cousre, if a liberal appears on Fox News, they are no longer considered a liberal by the left

[darin]

Right.

[red states rule]

Right.

Where is the employee from CNN trying to deny it? Did he "redeploy"?

Flashback: On Election Night 2000, NBC News Staffers Were 'All Cheering for Gore'
By Brent Baker | August 17, 2007 - 02:02 ET
The MSNBC staffers who booed President Bush in 2003 were just following the tradition set in 2000 when those at the NBC News flagship cheered on Al Gore. In the wake of Joe Scarborough's revelation Thursday morning that on his first day at MSNBC, on the night of President Bush's 2003 State of the Union address, “people in the newsroom...were booing the President basically from the beginning to the end” (Mark Finkelstein's post), a look back at how on the night of the 2000 election, NBC News employees were openly “cheering for Gore.”

As the MRC's Rich Noyes reminded me, the MRC's August 31, 2001 CyberAlert recounted:


On the election night, the NBC News control room was full of people “all cheering for Gore,” retiring General Electric CEO Jack Welch told Vanity Fair as he denied he pressured anyone to call the election for Bush, “and two or three of us cheering for George Bush.”

Welch’s revelation about the candidate preference of most NBC News staffers came in reaction to, as the Names & Faces column in the August 29 Washington Post reported, "rumors that he asked the men supervising computer projections, 'What would I have to give you to call the race for Bush?' Rep. Henry Waxman, a California Democrat, is threatening to subpoena a video recording of that night from NBC." (General Electric owns NBC.)

The Post quoted Welch as calling that "a crazy story." An August 28 Reuters dispatch quoted from the interview in the upcoming October issue of Vanity Fair as Welch, apparently referring to at least NBC News President Andy Lack, maintained: "To think you could ever influence two old pros who wouldn't call an election for anyone if their lives depended on it, is just plain silliness. The facts are there was a room there (at NBC on election night) of young kids all cheering for Gore and two or three of us cheering for George Bush. That's all that happened."

As anyone who has seen appearances by Welch on C-SPAN knows, he describes his 20-something and 30-something employees as "young kids."

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2007/08/17/flashback-election-night-2000-nbc-news-staffers-were-all-cheering-gore

hey guys and gals, here is another shocker........


Top Seattle Times Editor Admits Majority of Newsroom Votes 'Blue,' Driven by 'Activism'
By Brent Baker | August 16, 2007 - 05:40 ET

Seattle Times Executive Editor Dave Boardman, who in a Tuesday e-mail to his staff had scolded them for cheering Karl Rove's resignation (Ken Shepherd's NewsBusters item), wrote a follow-up e-mail on Wednesday in which he conceded the political display matched the “blue” perspective of the majority in his newsroom where, like most of journalism, reporters are driven by “activism.” Boardman acknowledged:


“If we wore our politics on our sleeves in here, I have no doubt that in this and in most other mainstream newsrooms in America, the majority of those sleeves would be of the same color: blue. Survey after survey over the years have demonstrated that most of the people who go into this business tend to vote Democratic, at least in national elections. That is not particularly surprising, given how people make career decisions and that social service and activism is a primary driver for many journalists.”

It's reassuring to learn that Boardman chided his staff for the outburst, but as he admitted it accurately reflected the political perspective of most journalists.

Romenesko on Wednesday night posted in full the second e-mail Boardman sent to his newsroom staff. An excerpt from the August 15 memo following up on reaction to his Tuesday e-mail in which he had said of the cheering: “That sort of expression is simply not appropriate for a newsroom.”


My Raves admonition on politically based cheering in the newsroom has ignited the predictable flame-throwing in the blogosphere, particularly from the portside. Allow me to riff a bit further on that, and on my reasoning....

The postings nearly everywhere speak not to the fundamental issues around newsroom decorum, but instead spring from one's place on the spectrum of Bush/Rove "Bad" or Bush/Rove "Good."

I ask you all to leave your personal politics at the front door for one simple reason: A good newsroom is a sacred and magical place in which we can and should test every assumption, challenge each other's thinking, ask the fundamental questions those in power hope we will overlook.

If we wore our politics on our sleeves in here, I have no doubt that in this and in most other mainstream newsrooms in America, the majority of those sleeves would be of the same color: blue. Survey after survey over the years have demonstrated that most of the people who go into this business tend to vote Democratic, at least in national elections. That is not particularly surprising, given how people make career decisions and that social service and activism is a primary driver for many journalists.

But if we allowed our news meetings to evolve into a liberal latte klatch, I have no doubt that a pathological case of group-think would soon set in....

It's not about "balance," which is a false construct. It isn't even about "objectivity," which is a laudable but probably unattainable goal. It is about independent thinking and sound, facts-based journalism -- the difference between what we do and the myopic screed that is passed off as "advocacy" journalism these days....


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2007/08/16/top-seattle-times-editor-admits-majority-newsroom-votes-blue-driven-act

[glockmail]

hey guys and gals, here is another shocker........


Top Seattle Times Editor Admits Majority of Newsroom Votes 'Blue,' Driven by 'Activism'
By Brent Baker | August 16, 2007 - 05:40 ET ... Isn't that the first step to recovery? There may yet be hope.

[red states rule]

Isn't that the first step to recovery? There may yet be hope.

not with the liberal media

They no longer try to hide their bias or even project an illusion of fairness.