The Role of the Media in US Politics | Thread profile

The Washington Beltway media establishment should be chastised by the Pulitzer won by the Boston Globe's Charlie Savage in the National Reporting category. Savage, as some of you will recall, was the investigative journalist who broke the story of Bush's prolific use of "signing statements" to subvert laws passed by Congress. White House correspondents should be asking themselves how an ...

Quote: Originally Posted by purplehawk Yep, September 11th was an eye-opener for most Americans. Katrina was another more recent example, but look how fast our attention turned elsewhere. And that, too, was manipulated by the powers-that-be. "Change the subject" is a potent weapon for American politicians....

Quote: Originally Posted by Daelin Oh please. One thing I know about the media, is that they are only as loyal to politicians, as a shark is to its lunch. Heh heh. Ain't that the truth. One week, the press loves you, and the next they're digging for dirt.

Quote: Originally Posted by Eileithyia Heh heh. Ain't that the truth. One week, the press loves you, and the next they're digging for dirt. This is true. But it is also true that the mainstream media gave Bush a pass that is unheard of in my lifetime. Consider the rush to war in Iraq. The media was ...

Quote: Originally Posted by purplehawk This is true. But it is also true that the mainstream media gave Bush a pass that is unheard of in my lifetime. Consider the rush to war in Iraq. The media was snowed as badly as the general populace - and by the same people. Funny, I see the media at large as ...

The mainstream media has gotten better about doing what Charlie Savage did so well: they report on what Bush does rather than just the soundbytes he throws out. But in 2002 and 2003, they might as well have been the advertising arm of the White House. Actually, I like Rosie and the Dixie Chicks. They're great patriots.

I don't believe this thread requires personal comments about others. Either engage the debate or just get gone from my site. Make your damn minds up.

Hey, guys, play nice, please? I want to try to keep the partisan stuff out as much as we can. I want this to be about the media, and their responsiblities, or lack thereof, not about Bush in particular. I know it's more current, but there is a long history to the media in this country. Let's stick to why the media does what it does, not about who. Quote:...

One question which may have come up, but I think is worth consideration, is how much the effect of conglomerates have on the media? I was reading BusinessWeek , and as part of disclosure policy they stated in stories about a number of companies, about their connection to them through their parent company. I don't think a lot of people know that most newspapers are owned individually, but ...

Well some are ie Rupert Murdock. He owns the sky network and is a very powerful person in media. I think he owns a network or two in america as well. He's right wing, donated loads of money to the conservative party during the thatcher years. What a network shows can be greatly influenced by the board. You don't report it this way you are out of a job