Why is the media liberal?

[MyLibertyStuff]

This has always kind of confused me. I cant really see why the media would be so liberal. They are highly paid, so the actual talking heads should be conservative. The companies dont like unions, which im sure there is one for workers, whether it be the techs or the anchors or whatever.

So why?

[Zera]

This has always kind of confused me. I cant really see why the media would be so liberal. They are highly paid, so the actual talking heads should be conservative. The companies dont like unions, which im sure there is one for workers, whether it be the techs or the anchors or whatever.

So why?

Liberals tend to act more civil and seem smarter, whereas you have people who are on Fox News who seem like lunatics, and are just idiots in general.

Neither are right most of the time, which is why you need to get out of the whole "liberal vs conservative" state of mind.

[MyLibertyStuff]

Liberals tend to act more civil and seem smarter, whereas you have people who are on Fox News who seem like lunatics, and are just idiots in general.

Neither are right most of the time, which is why you need to get out of the whole "liberal vs conservative" state of mind.

But this doesnt answer why there is 1 "conservative" media outlet and tons of liberal ones...

[LATruth]

The top 1% of the population owns the media and are looking out for said interests.

[Zera]

But this doesnt answer why there is 1 "conservative" media outlet and tons of liberal ones...

Why should it matter? They both suck. We'll probably never get a libertarian or paleoconservative media network, so it just doesn't matter. Stop caring.

[MyLibertyStuff]

Why should it matter? They both suck. We'll probably never get a libertarian or paleoconservative media network, so it just doesn't matter. Stop caring.

Ignorance isnt a very libertarian view :)

[MyLibertyStuff]

The top 1% of the population owns the media and are looking out for said interests.

So if the top 1% owns the media, why is it liberal? shouldnt they be conservative?

[Zera]

Ignorance isnt a very libertarian view :)

Caring about things that don't matter isn't either.

[spotics]

This has always kind of confused me. I cant really see why the media would be so liberal. They are highly paid, so the actual talking heads should be conservative. The companies dont like unions, which im sure there is one for workers, whether it be the techs or the anchors or whatever.

So why?

Academia influences the reporters. I would also say that whenever a major story breaks the reporters turn to government agencies for help. If there is a problem with crime, they call the police. If there is a problem with roads, they call the state highway department. If there is a problem with restaurants, they call the health inspector.

Government is whom the reporters usually call upon for answers whenever there is a problem

[LATruth]

So if the top 1% owns the media, why is it liberal? shouldnt they be conservative?

Depends on what goals you are trying to achieve.

[revolutionisnow]

With liberals comes change (usually for the worst) and forced acceptance. The liberal media sells these ideas through cloaked movements. Ex: The women's right movement got them tax revenue from the other half of the country, and also contributed to the destruction of the family unit. Then you also have the various media influences to desensitize and wash away their morals. When people have no family unit and compromised morals its very easy to manipulate them.

If the media was conservative, there would be little to no change, because they would be rigid in their beliefs. Imagine if your grandparents ran the media.

[LATruth]

With liberals comes change (usually for the worst) and forced acceptance. The liberal media sells these ideas through cloaked movements. Ex: The women's right movement got them tax revenue from the other half of the country, and also contributed to the destruction of the family unit. Then you also have the various media influences to desensitize and wash away their morals. When people have no family unit and compromised morals its very easy to manipulate them.

If the media was conservative, there would be little to no change, because they would be rigid in their beliefs. Imagine if your grandparents ran the media.

yes, we agree on something. :)

[Athan]

This has always kind of confused me. I cant really see why the media would be so liberal. They are highly paid, so the actual talking heads should be conservative. The companies dont like unions, which im sure there is one for workers, whether it be the techs or the anchors or whatever.

So why?

They are not entrepreneurs. The are high paid employees of corporations that siphon funds from other businesses. If they tried to run a business, they would fail and would be bitching about taxes and etc.

[MyLibertyStuff]

They are not entrepreneurs. The are high paid employees of corporations that siphon funds from other businesses. If they tried to run a business, they would fail and would be bitching about taxes and etc.

But they are still highly paid, and therefore do care about the taxes.

Just to clarify I am a libertarian haha I am just confused on this.

[revolutionisnow]

They're employees first and taxpayers somewhere way down the line. Just doing my job mentality. I'm sure a lot of their actual opinions are different than their tv personalities opinions also.

[JdotRdot]

But this doesnt answer why there is 1 "conservative" media outlet and tons of liberal ones...
watch this & you will understand
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUYCBfmIcHM

it's all social engineering...if it were all liberal it would seem fishy. Rupert Murdoch owns Fox news, but he makes his biggest contributions to the democratic party
the NRA is also party to the political machine

you gotta be careful who you put your trust in out there

[nate895]

So if the top 1% owns the media, why is it liberal? shouldnt they be conservative?

Rich people tend to be liberal. Why? Because if the government is responsible for the poor people, they won't have to be. In a free market society, when some liberal Hollywood scumbag says we need to save the starving children in Africa, that someone can just be told to pony up dollars or be told what kind of hypocrite he is.

[mellamojuana]

IMO, people who lean toward liberalism probably are open, accepting, generous, etc., and haven't been deeply hurt themselves directly by gov't agencies gone amok. They are able to go thru life with blinders. After all, they are OK people; why wouldn't the entire government be?

When you've been run over and flattened like Mrs. Doubtfire's face on the street, courtesy of one of your governments, or all of them, you lose that warm, trusting feeling toward them. If governments haven't hurt you directly (that you've been aware enough to detect), those governments surely can't be bad. The latter is probably the liberal point of view. :(

[Reason]

The concept of a "liberal dominated media" is mostly bullshit.

Different MSM outlets pander to their niche viewer bases.

Anyone getting their "news" from MSM sources is most likely not interested in anything more than a skin deep knowledge of what's actually going on anyway

[hugolp]

Leftist are more for fashion and hype (at least here in Europe), and thats why they are more influentiable.

I am not saying right wingers are not influentiable by tv. They are, just not so much.

[Drknows]

I wouldn't say the media is liberal. Even the "liberal media" paints Dennis Kucinich as crazy and fringe.

What i see is neither conservative or liberal. I see a two party system that tells the public what they want them to hear and not what they need to know.


There are so many variables involved. Dumb public, bad journalism, special interest groups, money ect its one big infomercial with headlines.

[Objectivist]

I'd have to ask why you are the way you are?

[ramallamamama]

watch this & you will understand
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUYCBfmIcHM

it's all social engineering...if it were all liberal it would seem fishy. Rupert Murdoch owns Fox news, but he makes his biggest contributions to the democratic party
the NRA is also party to the political machine

you gotta be careful who you put your trust in out there
Thanks for that vid, it's a gem.

[JdotRdot]

Thanks for that vid, it's a gem.
if you haven't seen it
Behind Big News
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6632255652046262625

pertains more to the media itself
if most people don't fully trust the news why do they continue to watch it??
if most people don't trust politicians why do they continue to vote for them??

if you didn't watch it either go look at "brainwashing a nation" in the Dodd link i posted, it's an interview with an ex KGB talking about communism in Russia

[MyLibertyStuff]

I'd have to ask why you are the way you are?

Was that directed to me?

[idiom]

The media is supposed to be anti-establishment, or at least hold the govenrment to account.

In America, the media is part of the establishment. Its almost like state TV. Its corporate tv in a corporate state.

Take CNBC, they would have to start by asking their bosses why their mega corporation is insolvent.

[paulitics]

I wouldn't say the media is liberal. Even the "liberal media" paints Dennis Kucinich as crazy and fringe.

What i see is neither conservative or liberal. I see a two party system that tells the public what they want them to hear and not what they need to know.


There are so many variables involved. Dumb public, bad journalism, special interest groups, money ect its one big infomercial with headlines.

I would not call him the most liberal, if you mean one who is for an all powerful government. He is the most anti-establishment democrat I can think of.
He is extremely anti-war. He never voted for the war on terror police state bills. He didn't vote for the bailouts. Kucinich and Paul are often the only 2 congressmen voting no on very bad bills.

They media portrays him as fringe because he challenges the establishment and gets people thinking much like Ralph Nader. He is extremely libertarian on certain things, and doesn't hesitate to criticise his own party.

[paulitics]

So if the top 1% owns the media, why is it liberal? shouldnt they be conservative?

Most millionaires are conservative. They would like to keep their money.

Most well connected, powerful billionaires are liberals. They want to steal other people's money.

Monopoly men like a powerful government. Through excessive regulation they can eliminate competition from smaller business because the overhead for compliance is too costly.

The media also is instrumental in shaping the public's perception. They teach them to not trust your family, church, your neighbor, or your local small business.

On the other hand, they teach you to always trust anything that has the appearnce of authority. They always call government the authorities, or officials.
The way they affect their voices is nothing more than brainwashing techniques to get you to stop thinking critically.

If you notice, most newsprograms are horrible, and their ratings are low. It is not about making money, but influencing public perception. They want a domesticated public so they can maintain their power. Another misconception is that they are anti-war, which is false. They are 90% in favor of war, until after the event. Even the Iraq war, they sold the lie to the gullible Americans that Iraq was an imminent danger.

[pcosmar]

This has always kind of confused me. I cant really see why the media would be so liberal. They are highly paid, so the actual talking heads should be conservative. The companies dont like unions, which im sure there is one for workers, whether it be the techs or the anchors or whatever.

So why?

They are Not liberal. They are not Conservative, They are Propaganda.
Always remember, And never forget.
http://tmh.floonet.net/articles/cia_press.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Propaganda

Propaganda is a specific type of message presentation, aimed at serving an agenda. Even if the message conveys true information, it may be partisan and fail to paint a complete picture. The book Propaganda And Persuasion defines propaganda as "the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behavior to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist."

[tangent4ronpaul]

This has always kind of confused me. I cant really see why the media would be so liberal. They are highly paid, so the actual talking heads should be conservative. The companies don't like unions, which i'm sure there is one for workers, whether it be the techs or the anchors or whatever.

So why?

It's pretty basic. Russia targeted the educational, motion picture, news media, Intel and scientific R&D (especially mil stuff) communities.

China targeted R&D, Intel and our Congress. The reason so many of our reps are TRATORS!

Israel also spies on us and has highly infiltrated our gvmt. It has a lot to do with banking....

This stems from the cold war.

-t

[werdd]

My opinion is that the media stands to grab a bigger and more brainwash worthy audience if they present them selves as liberals. Most americans just want a handout from the goverment, most americans have given up on the idea that they can be all that they can be, and they would rather work in an auto union all their life. They would rather receive goverment handouts from the rich, than aspire to be rich themselves.

It's an easy idea to market to stupid americans.

[AutoDas]

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=4CDAB99FAB5980BA

That will explain how socialism has survived even though the 20th century has demonstrated it is impossible. Socialists didn't go extinct when their system failed, no they just change their affiliation to social democrats and compassionate conservatives.

[Kludge]

The media is liberal?

Seems pretty much in line with the ideology of Americans. Fox News is very (neo)"conservative". Prime-time MSNBC is very (social)"liberal". There are a few libertarians thrown in.

I don't think the problem is not enough conservatism or liberalism in the media, but the authoritarian slant of their ideologies.

I'd love to have a liberal media, so long as it weren't socialist.

[AuH20]

My opinion is that the media stands to grab a bigger and more brainwash worthy audience if they present them selves as liberals. Most americans just want a handout from the goverment, most americans have given up on the idea that they can be all that they can be, and they would rather work in an auto union all their life. They would rather receive goverment handouts from the rich, than aspire to be rich themselves.
It's an easy idea to market to stupid americans.

Don't you wish Americans finally realized that there's no such thing as "free stuff"? The financial implosion is proof positive of this near sighted thought process.

[ramallamamama]

Thank you for all the great vids you linked pcosmar, JdotRdot and AutoDas.

[MyLibertyStuff]

Thanks everyone for the awesome material

[max]

media is left wing / statist because it is jewish controlled. Zionists have always yearned for world socialist government ......

http://www.natall.com/who-rules-america/index.html

[acptulsa]

Most millionaires are conservative. They would like to keep their money.

Most well connected, powerful billionaires are liberals. They want to steal other people's money.

Monopoly men like a powerful government. Through excessive regulation they can eliminate competition from smaller business because the overhead for compliance is too costly.

The media also is instrumental in shaping the public's perception. They teach them to not trust your family, church, your neighbor, or your local small business.

On the other hand, they teach you to always trust anything that has the appearnce of authority. They always call government the authorities, or officials.
The way they affect their voices is nothing more than brainwashing techniques to get you to stop thinking critically.

If you notice, most newsprograms are horrible, and their ratings are low. It is not about making money, but influencing public perception. They want a domesticated public so they can maintain their power. Another misconception is that they are anti-war, which is false. They are 90% in favor of war, until after the event. Even the Iraq war, they sold the lie to the gullible Americans that Iraq was an imminent danger.

Perfect.

Follow the money. The media serves the powers that be. Conservatives tend to believe in small government. Now, if you're a banker and you want billions and billions of taxpayer dollars handed to you on a silver platter, do you go to true conservatives? If you're a lawmaker and you want a lobbyist to keep buying you lobster bisque for lunch, do you champion true conservatism? Or do you find a way to fool the liberals into believing that this handout to Monsanto is good for the poor?

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

This has always kind of confused me. I cant really see why the media would be so liberal. They are highly paid, so the actual talking heads should be conservative. The companies dont like unions, which im sure there is one for workers, whether it be the techs or the anchors or whatever.

So why?

This would be a great and complex European question, but we are simple Americans. As Americans, we are blessed in that we have a very basic political system.
First, we need to reduce tyranny down to what it truly is with it being the business of pimping and whoring.
As people tend to have to return to the relying on their families during times of economic turmoil, the reason people need to have a healthy economy in the first place is so that they can escape from the past persecutions caused when we lived in traditional families. The traditional family entailed fathers selling their daughters off as livestock and older brothers pimping their younger sisters on the streets.
In other words, tyranny isn't a mystery but a responsible thing that we are all related to.
A lot of us are still loyalists, though, in how we still live in this old, European world which was a time when only the property owning pimps were considered to be born with a business agenda while the rest of the vast majority of the world's population were whores put here to be pimped.
The "break" in political tradition between the old world and a new one happened when our Founding-Fathers created not a traditional nation as official rulers (based on legal-precedence) but a new kind of one as actors acting on the behalf of the lowly people (based on a Civil-Purpose). This is clearly depicted in both the formal documents of The Declaration of Independence, our divorce decree from tyranny, and The U.S. Constitution, our marriage decree to a more perfect government.
"We the people . . .."
So, I don't think the media is naive because they are stupid. They certainly aren't stupid. The media has become part of tyranny because they have lost their souls in matters of what it means to be an American. In being an American, we don't just consider the business agenda that sits pimps down on their thrones, no, this is an easy, downhill business in comparison; but, Americans understand that all men, both men and women, are born equally with business agendas. This profound declaration means that every trespassing whore living on the street is born with an inward burden.