http://www.allsides.com/

Runnin said:
http://www.allsides.com/

Here's an interesting online news site I've just discovered. It presents the same news story from 3 different biases: left, center and right.

Let's hear folks bitch about this.
Click to expand...

Nice thought but it won't matter at all. People will still only consider the "news" that agrees with their already held belief system as being accurate, no matter how far out it may really be. How many times have you seen recently someone point out "the liberal bias" of the media? And if you only consider the "mainstream media, like the 3 major networks and left leaning sources like HuffPo, DailyKos, and the NYTimes" you'd be right or at least pretty close to right. But if you consider all the sources where people get their news I think it would pretty much balance out. Between Fox, talk radio, and the right leaning sources online I think they definitely at least come close to balancing out the total picture.

The problem is, those on the left tend to see the mainstream media I just mentioned as the news, the truth, the facts, etc., while they see those right leaning sources I just mentioned as right wing propaganda. Those on the right see the right leaning sources I just mentioned (the ones they already agree with) as the news, the facts, etc., while they see the mainstream media as left wing propaganda. My problem with the mainstream media is that they are biased towards the left, but they deny it, my problem with the right leaning sources is that they are biased towards the right AND after the Pavlovian brainwashing epidemic from W's first term they managed to establish (and sadly this is still true today) that the left is biased but we tell the truth, after all we're America's most trusted news sources, until you call them on some utter BS piece they run and then they retreat back to "well we're news and opinion" or "we're news and entertainment". I read a piece a while back where Sean Hannity called himself "a talk show host" and therefore he could be held accountable for spewing BS and calling it truth.

Until both sides actually hold their own "news sources" accountable for telling the actual truth, the actual facts, etc., this will literally NEVER change. The left doesn't care what the right thinks about anything, and the right doesn't care what the left thinks about anything. Real change can only come from within one's own group and let's face it between the classical conditioning of the past few decades and the arrogance and uber competition over perceived ideals of "my side" that's simply not going to change. As a teacher I can tell you for an absolute fact that you can't teach anyone anything until you've first convinced them that they don't already know everything. How many Americans do you know, in person, online, etc., who fit that last description?
 
We just have to make sure everyone reads the coverage of the same story from all three columns. But great resource.

I think the one thing sorely lacking in today's political discussion is an understanding of what the other side is saying and why they are saying it. I'm no Prince of Balance, but as a lobbyist, I've had to check (and sometimes temper) by biases (yes, I have them) against the positions of legislators, administration officials, and other lobbyists. I cannot "be" them, but I can work to understand why they believe something different from my position. It helps me gauge the strengths and weaknesses of my vantage point instead of going all Al Davis "Just win baby!"

So thanks Runnin!

PS--I blame both sides for the current state of debate, but I will always have a special animus reserved for Karl Rove, who successfully divided the country into little demographic bits to be moved about on a chess board in a cynical us v. them game. Politics is always us v. them, but I think he brought it to a whole new level. He wasn't alone and lefty pols contributed, but I lay a lot of blame at his feet. At the end of the day, we are all Americans and we need to get used to that reality.
 
50PoundHead said:
We just have to make sure everyone reads the coverage of the same story from all three columns. But great resource.

I think the one thing sorely lacking in today's political discussion is an understanding of what the other side is saying and why they are saying it. I'm no Prince of Balance, but as a lobbyist, I've had to check (and sometimes temper) by biases (yes, I have them) against the positions of legislators, administration officials, and other lobbyists. I cannot "be" them, but I can work to understand why they believe something different from my position. It helps me gauge the strengths and weaknesses of my vantage point instead of going all Al Davis "Just win baby!"

So thanks Runnin!

PS--I blame both sides for the current state of debate, but I will always have a special animus reserved for Karl Rove, who successfully divided the country into little demographic bits to be moved about on a chess board in a cynical us v. them game. Politics is always us v. them, but I think he brought it to a whole new level. He wasn't alone and lefty pols contributed, but I lay a lot of blame at his feet. At the end of the day, we are all Americans and we need to get used to that reality.
Click to expand...

I definitely agree about Rove and his ilk, but as you well know every time one side does something "shady" and wins the other side takes that "shady element" and feeds it Miracle Grow for 4 years and low and behold we have a new "winning formula". Look at Florida in 2000, both parties were caught red handed in questionable voting and voter registration actions, but the Repubs were simply better at it and they won. Then the Dems countered with ACORN, which was pretty much "much ado about nothing" but it was a big talking point for the Repubs and the Dems, then we have Citizens United, or as I like to call it, the more zeros you have at the end of your bank account, the more of a true US Citizen you are and therefore the more say you should have in how things are run. Where does it all end?

I know I have a particular hatred for talk radio, but to me Rush was way more influential in splitting us up into little like minded groups to be moved around on a (I prefer to use checker board than chess board with him) for our own devices, than anyone else. Sure, since he was so good at it the Dems have countered with their attempts to do the same thing, but IMO Rush was at the bottom of this most recent wave of divided America. After all, didn't Reagan say something along the lines of, "if we agree on 80% we can still be friends"? With Rush and the modern day folks on the far right (and many on the far left too) even 99% isn't good enough.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
I definitely agree about Rove and his ilk, but as you well know every time one side does something "shady" and wins the other side takes that "shady element" and feeds it Miracle Grow for 4 years and low and behold we have a new "winning formula". Look at Florida in 2000, both parties were caught red handed in questionable voting and voter registration actions, but the Repubs were simply better at it and they won. Then the Dems countered with ACORN, which was pretty much "much ado about nothing" but it was a big talking point for the Repubs and the Dems, then we have Citizens United, or as I like to call it, the more zeros you have at the end of your bank account, the more of a true US Citizen you are and therefore the more say you should have in how things are run. Where does it all end?

I know I have a particular hatred for talk radio, but to me Rush was way more influential in splitting us up into little like minded groups to be moved around on a (I prefer to use checker board than chess board with him) for our own devices, than anyone else. Sure, since he was so good at it the Dems have countered with their attempts to do the same thing, but IMO Rush was at the bottom of this most recent wave of divided America. After all, didn't Reagan say something along the lines of, "if we agree on 80% we can still be friends"? With Rush and the modern day folks on the far right (and many on the far left too) even 99% isn't good enough.
Click to expand...

My disdain for Rove emanates from his ability (and maybe I'm just jealous) to "scientize" the process to an extent that makes it bloodless.

Agree totally with the advent of the "100 Percenters" currently pervading the system. If you ask me for one of the major reasons Hillary lost, it would be she had more of the unbreakable and overweening "100 Percenters" in her flock and lost a lot of "50 Percenters" in the process. Maybe that's where Trump succeeds. He's outside the system, so maybe he can tell everybody to grow the h*ll up and realize that for all of our differences we are all still Americans (or maybe not). I've always believed America is a center/right country that has center/left hiccups. This election seems to mark the end of the hiccups. Curious to where we go from here.
 
How far left have they gone (or how far right has the nations media consumer gone) that WSJ and CSM are considered central?
 
zitothebrave said:
How far left have they gone (or how far right has the nations media consumer gone) that WSJ and CSM are considered central?
Click to expand...

I think the WSJ news pages are centrist. Their editorial page is as far right as the The New York Times editorial page is left.

People tend to get news coverage and editorial page stances mixed up. I think The New York Times basic coverage went overboard this election season by letting their previous run-ins with Trump cloud their coverage. But they did provide some coverage--especially relating to the tax breaks he received to aid his development efforts--that weren't reported anywhere else and I thought were some of the more pertinent points in my worries about Trump.
 
50PoundHead said:
My disdain for Rove emanates from his ability (and maybe I'm just jealous) to "scientize" the process to an extent that makes it bloodless.

Let's see, make the process bloodless, "scientizing it" painless, at least for those who really matter...hmm...as a history person where have I heard this before?? Hmmm....

Agree totally with the advent of the "100 Percenters" currently pervading the system. If you ask me for one of the major reasons Hillary lost, it would be she had more of the unbreakable and overweening "100 Percenters" in her flock and lost a lot of "50 Percenters" in the process. Maybe that's where Trump succeeds. He's outside the system, so maybe he can tell everybody to grow the h*ll up and realize that for all of our differences we are all still Americans (or maybe not). I've always believed America is a center/right country that has center/left hiccups. This election seems to mark the end of the hiccups. Curious to where we go from here.

There are obviously things I DON'T like about Trump (duh) but there are other things I do like about him, or at least about his campaign promises, things that neither the Repub or Dem parties would touch with a 10 foot pole. I guess we'll see. On the center/right with some center left hiccups I completely agree with that. I think this might be where both parties "miss it" the most. The left seems to think that most people are as far left and "enlightened" as they are, which isn't true, and the right seems to think that if they pay lip service to those right leaning tendencies, agendas, etc., that we'll all be OK with them raping and pillaging the national treasury and we'll just let that go.
Click to expand...
. One of my son's friends who he said voted for Trump said how epic this election was because it only took one man (Trump) to destroy both of our main political parties and he did it in one election. It may be a little early to say that but I can definitely see his point.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
. One of my son's friends who he said voted for Trump said how epic this election was because it only took one man (Trump) to destroy both of our main political parties and he did it in one election. It may be a little early to say that but I can definitely see his point.
Click to expand...

Trump will be a work in progress and my primary fear about him isn't over many of his proposed policies, but that he's going to run his administration like a television show and worry constantly about the ratings instead of getting necessary things done.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
Nice thought but it won't matter at all. People will still only consider the "news" that agrees with their already held belief system as being accurate, no matter how far out it may really be. How many times have you seen recently someone point out "the liberal bias" of the media? And if you only consider the "mainstream media, like the 3 major networks and left leaning sources like HuffPo, DailyKos, and the NYTimes" you'd be right or at least pretty close to right. But if you consider all the sources where people get their news I think it would pretty much balance out. Between Fox, talk radio, and the right leaning sources online I think they definitely at least come close to balancing out the total picture.

The problem is, those on the left tend to see the mainstream media I just mentioned as the news, the truth, the facts, etc., while they see those right leaning sources I just mentioned as right wing propaganda. Those on the right see the right leaning sources I just mentioned (the ones they already agree with) as the news, the facts, etc., while they see the mainstream media as left wing propaganda. My problem with the mainstream media is that they are biased towards the left, but they deny it, my problem with the right leaning sources is that they are biased towards the right AND after the Pavlovian brainwashing epidemic from W's first term they managed to establish (and sadly this is still true today) that the left is biased but we tell the truth, after all we're America's most trusted news sources, until you call them on some utter BS piece they run and then they retreat back to "well we're news and opinion" or "we're news and entertainment". I read a piece a while back where Sean Hannity called himself "a talk show host" and therefore he could be held accountable for spewing BS and calling it truth.

Until both sides actually hold their own "news sources" accountable for telling the actual truth, the actual facts, etc., this will literally NEVER change. The left doesn't care what the right thinks about anything, and the right doesn't care what the left thinks about anything. Real change can only come from within one's own group and let's face it between the classical conditioning of the past few decades and the arrogance and uber competition over perceived ideals of "my side" that's simply not going to change. As a teacher I can tell you for an absolute fact that you can't teach anyone anything until you've first convinced them that they don't already know everything. How many Americans do you know, in person, online, etc., who fit that last description?
Click to expand...

57 doesn't agree with you, sorry. Anything the Left say is the gospel truth, nothing else matters.
 
This is interesting, though I'm sure many would want to know the bias of the chart maker.

News.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top