The Journal Times Online - Racine, Wisconsin

Posted by: Underdog on September 8, 2008 9:59AM CST After seeing this mornings polls, BO has to be pulling his hair out of his head this morning. He himself said Palin's pregnant daughter was off limits. So what does the media do? How does the saying go..."With friends like that, who needs enemies"?

Posted by: Dr. Awkward on September 8, 2008 10:00AM CST If their behavior has hurt Obama, shouldn't you be all for it? This doesn't sound very pro-Obama to me: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZTo0iGc_Dw

Posted by: native man on September 8, 2008 10:10AM CST Dr A. No. I am for truth in journalism, not for agenda based reporting. This biased reporting has been going on for awhile and getting worse. I think we are starting to see a backlash from the public. I think the RJ needs to look at its practises as well.

Posted by: AvengingAngel on September 8, 2008 10:13AM CST I certainly am not an advocate of this kind of "jounalism" regardless of its affect on Obama. The broadcast networks are doing very poorly. NBC, with their blantant liberal bias, has been doing the worst. People are defintely voting with their feet.

Posted by: Dr. Awkward on September 8, 2008 10:48AM CST I'm glad to hear everyone wants their news to come from inbiased sources. I don't mean to change your topic nativemn, but what then about FoxNews, where you got this headline from? Certainly not everything the say is flawed or biased (as with the other networks), but an awful lot of it is, as are their personalities. Not to mention very often downright inaccurate. Unprofessional at the very least, you would have to admit. The article this headline is from repeatedly uses the word "booted," referring to Matthews and Olbermann being replaced. And they (FoxNews) have perpetuated many of the lies and rumors that have gone around about Obama. Don't many of those who disapprove of the bias in the media just want it to be biased in the "right" direction? No one can make the claim that just because a source is not liberally biased does not make it unbiased. Or, say, fair and balanced.

Posted by: native man on September 8, 2008 11:04AM CST Dr A. I did not get any headline from Fox News. I did not refer to any news agency. I gleam information from many available sources. Having been the victim of prejudice in reporting I believe little from any one source. And no, I do not want biased leaning to the right. Bias belongs only in the editorial sections. The problem is most reporters are editorializing instead of reporting.

Posted by: Dr. Awkward on September 8, 2008 11:10AM CST Interesting. What's this headline say? http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/08/msnbc-hosts-olbermann-matthews-booted-from-political-night-duties/ It's not an AP headling, it says "by FoxNews.com"

Posted by: Give Me a Break on September 8, 2008 11:19AM CST Dr. Here's another place that is biased where the headline could have come from. Is this biased too? Well, if the writer wasn't falling overhimself to blame the RNC, it might have been. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/08/AR2008090800008_pf.html

Posted by: Dr. Awkward on September 8, 2008 11:34AM CST JAK - Look closely at The FoxNews article I cited. It is verbatim the title of this blog. Not just along the same lines.

Posted by: native man on September 8, 2008 11:44AM CST Dr. A. I owe you an apology. I thought you were asking me NATIVE MAN about a headline in my response. I did not quote a headline and assumed perhaps you lost your mind. It is I NATIVE MAN who lost his mind. You were talking to racinenativemn. I stand corrected.

Posted by: Dr. Awkward on September 8, 2008 11:53AM CST native man, I clearly made the same mistake. When I read your post, I thought you were racinenativemn responding. Maybe I'll have to start calling one of you Chachi to avoid the confusion. :) No apology necessary. Too bad, I was looking forward to how racinenativemn was going to back up his denial of the headline. Next tiiiiiime, racinenativemn!!! (shaking fist angrily)

Posted by: mytwosense on September 8, 2008 12:09PM CST To the point of Olbermann and Matthews getting the boot, it may not be bias by itself. It seeme the media in gereral is focusing on stuff that is not really important to performing a job. Palin's family stuff was an example. Just low quality reporting. Readers and advertsisers are noticing it more and taking action. US Magazine reportedly lost allot of subs. The media may finally be realizing it's better to irritate the least amount of people.

Posted by: Dr. Awkward on September 8, 2008 12:38PM CST Personally, I only watched the speeches (not all of them), which is more than I usually do. As TBV has said, these conventions are a tremendous waste of money. I watched them on MPTV because there was almost no commentary...plus it was in 1080i HD, and looked lightyears better than the 720p broadcast on ch. 4.

Posted by: Mr B on September 8, 2008 1:13PM CST TBV - Bill O'reilly and Hannity are not as biased as those two??????????????? Do you really take that statement seriously. Come on!!!!!!!!! I agree Olberman is way over the top but no more so than most of those on FOX. I do think it is hilareous FOX trots out Dick Morris and he used the word "ethics". Wasn't he caught using prostitutes and pretty much sold his services to whom ever would pay him.

Posted by: Mr B on September 8, 2008 1:15PM CST I do agree Olberman and Matthews should not do political reporting since they are biased.

Posted by: Stinky on September 8, 2008 2:37PM CST As an avid Fox viewer I don't think I'm going too far by saying that Fox leans right. Obviously Hannity is partisan but so is his co-host Colmes, but they try to have equal time for the opposing viewpoint on that show. Watch O'reilley tonight and see if he is unfair in his Obama interview. Olberman & Matthews dont even TRY to keep their bias in check and yet still want to be thought of as journalist and not pundits ( ooh - my leg is tingling). My point is this - IMHO it's not so much the slanted view that turns people off as it is that they are trying to portray it is honest and objective. If you want to be considered a news organization that keep it down the middle. If you want to voice your bias viewpoint - fine but admit to it up front and let people know that is NOT an unbiased view. I believe Fox does both of these - depending on the show. MrB. - If I recall I think Morris and his wife were using call girls for their 3-ways. Also, I think that after all those years with the Clintons - he is just anti-Clinton.

Posted by: Dr. Awkward on September 8, 2008 3:09PM CST Stinky - I don't think it's fair to say "Fox does both of these - depending on the show." Either they do as a network, or they don't. Can I say MSNBC is unbiased and brings you the news right down the middle - depending on the show? You don't like it when a network tries to portray itself as honest and objective. Like calling itself "fair and balanced"? I've already been told no information given on Fox and Friends should be considered news. It's just good time silly hour. Now neither can Hannity & Colmes because it's commentary. What can I take as factual, unbiased news on the network? At what times of day is it FoxNews, and at what times of day is it FoxOpEds? In my opinion, most of it is commentary. Perhaps all of the networks said to have a liberal bias are actually factual and objective, and exceptions to that are just sections of commentary. Not news. If Fox get such a convenient pass, why can't they all?

Posted by: Toad on September 8, 2008 3:48PM CST I won't miss either one of them. As for Olberman, he was gonna go nuts anyhow with his over kill of O'Reilly. Chris didn't have the **** to argue with anyone. He liked screwing with people.

Posted by: Stinky on September 8, 2008 4:23PM CST Sorry Dr. - I disagree. Just because its called Fox News Channel doesn't mean that every single second of programming has to be a news program, where the 'fair and balanced' mantra rules apply. I honestly don't think anyone really believes that Hannity & Colmes is a news show. As I clearly stated, the problem that viewers had with Olberman and Matthews is they were pretending to be an objective news source while they obviously were not. If MSNBC wants to have a show called "Liberal leanings of Keith Olberman" then fine. Everyone knows the agenda. Then when they have MSNBC new hour - keep it down the middle. MSNBC does neither. I never watch Fox and Friends, but if in fact its silly hour like you state, then consider it another morning show and don't expect hard hitting news from it.

Posted by: great dane on September 8, 2008 5:20PM CST Dave, what "other network" are you talking about?? I've seen them all and none of them are "fair and balanced." I just like reading the carousal!!!! You can mute your TV that way.

Posted by: AvengingAngel on September 8, 2008 11:40PM CST Overall, I have a lot of respect for the Fox News Channel. MSNBC has had such a small share of the viewing audience mostly because of the obvious bias of these two. Throw rocks all you want at Fox News, but the vast majority of people are watching them, not CNN or MSNBC.

Posted by: ALWAYS FREE on September 9, 2008 1:33AM CST Fox has Shepard Smith+brief news bits on the half hour+breaking news as it happens+ scrolling news at the bottom of the screen. Their opinion pieces are honestly represented as just that, opinion. Bill O'Reilly tends to be more Libertarian, than either Democrat or Republican, and he'll go after either side with a vengeance. The other networks are all trying to pass their opinion off as news. Hannity is admittedly conservative, Colmes is clearly liberal Greta seems to swing both ways as does Geraldo. Megan Kelly is reasonably objective, maybe ever so slightly left of center, but not so much as to be annoying. So yes I think it's fair to say Fox is "fair and balanced".

Posted by: ALWAYS FREE on September 9, 2008 1:41AM CST BTW Fox also has Susan Estrich on one side and Newt Gingrich on the Other.

Posted by: Mr B on September 9, 2008 8:29AM CST I watched the Fox feed from the floor of both conventions. There is no way that was near balanced. The commentators were all throwing around the word "liberal" like a smear. I do agree MSNBC is biased toward the left (as well as the Daily Show). Even longer shows (Sarah Palin: American Woman), have a bias.

Posted by: DobberDeeDee on September 9, 2008 4:00PM CST Olberman is just so NASTY. Whether he is a liberal or a conservative wouldn't matter much to me, if he would just be a little calmer. He looks like (and acts like) he is about to have a stroke! He is NOT helping MSNBC with their ratings.

Posted by: Mr B on September 9, 2008 4:04PM CST Stinky - A call girl is a whore in fact since he was including his wife makes Morris even a bigger freak!

Posted by: Toad on September 9, 2008 5:14PM CST It's all becoming REAL clear. It's as simple as BLACK and WHITE.

Posted by: Stinky on September 9, 2008 5:26PM CST Mr B. - don't get me wrong - I wasn't in any way condoning Morris. Just saying it was consentual or should I spell it con-sensual. :) He and his wife may have different sexual interest but he is a brilliant political mind.

Posted by: MauriceH. on September 10, 2008 12:04AM CST Don't care for Matthews but I like Obermann - he's funny. Don't really get to watch too much TV overall so maybe that's why I missed the whole "left wing media bias conspiracy" thing of the last decade - LOL. If Americans are stupid enough to get their viewpoints from watching television - then we are in bigger trouble than I thought. I get my views from what I see and experience and what I believe is right.

Posted by: Mr B on September 10, 2008 6:51AM CST So was Clinton but I don't here many accolades for him from the right.

Posted by: Dr. Awkward on September 10, 2008 7:20AM CST Mr. B., he should have been the most accomplished President. After all, he was Governor for eleven years. That's more than five times longer than Palin, and the fact she has spent (almost) two years in the Governor's Mansion sure is being held in high regard.

Posted by: Stinky on September 10, 2008 2:54PM CST I am in NO WAY a fan of Bill Clinton, but he may be one of the greatest politicians this country has seen in a very long time. NOT the greatest president, mind you, but a great politician and yes a great political mind. There's one accolade from someone on the 'right'.

Posted by: Dr. Awkward on September 10, 2008 5:20PM CST Hardly an accolade, Stinky. On of the greatest politicians. Aren't you just saying he was good at being bad? And he left behind that nasty surplus to boot!

Posted by: ALWAYS FREE on September 10, 2008 6:46PM CST Yes DR. he and the Republican Congress did leave us with a surplus. That was before the twin towers were hit, and Enron who had dealings with both political parties collapsed.

Posted by: MauriceH. on September 11, 2008 9:54PM CST TBV - Well - he did help those people get the city to get the asbestos out of their housing back in the day in Chicago. I know - wouldn't want to highlight actual community work in a race full of politicians. LOL.