If you still call yourselves that. I'm confused. You who are supposed to bring a clear picture of world events without personal agenda are confusing the American public. The journalistic ethics that were taught when I was in the midst of my communication education have been completely abandoned for what is starting to look like a propaganda arm for the State. Who, what, when and how have been replaced by spin, redirect, confuse and pontificate. Before you roll your eyes and refuse to read further, please let me provide you with examples. Perhaps by seeing, what is so apparent to others, in black and white, you will be able to absorb the fact that you have abandoned the main function of the press: to protect the American people by providing them with knowledge in the form of facts. I have made a list. The list is short in comparison to the narrative, but this will have to do. This is a list of conclusions that you have come to and the perspective that you have written and reported from.
1) It is okay for President Obama to say that the rich need to pay their fair share, but it is a mortal sin for Governor Romney to point out that half the citizens of the country do not pay any federal tax.
2) It is okay for President Obama to lie about the cause of the attacks in Cairo and Libya, but it is not okay for Romney to tell the truth about the situation, because apparently speaking too soon in the news cycle is frowned upon.
3) It is okay for the Obama campaign to accuse Romney of causing a woman's death, but Obama actually caused the death of our Ambassador and three of the staff, through negligence but no questions are asked.
4) It is right and prudent to censor speech against the Muslim religion, but a Broadway play making fun of Mormons is just fine.
5) A movie caused unrest in the Middle East and should be censored, but the movie about killing Osama is just fine. (And that is without the argument for more questions about the security access provided the makers of the movie and the constant security leaks coming from this administration.)
6) Unions can raise money and produce ads to support a candidate, but tax-paying business owners should be denied that privilege.
7) We all need to have a stake in and pay for everyones healthcare because it's the right thing to do, but unions and large businesses can get exemptions, even though without their revenue the plan cannot mathematically work and the onus is placed squarely on small, middle-class, business owners.
8) A CNN reporter tweets to fund raise for Obama and reporters wear "Journalists for Obama" shirts while covering the DNC, but Fox news is biased. (Perhaps not announcing your bias would at least give the appearance.)
9) Obama skips intelligence meetings claiming to read the briefings on an ipad but admits in public that he can't figure out how to work an iphone. Really?
10) Romney is the one not ready for foreign policy decisions, yet he is the only one that had actually visited our greatest ally, Isreal, and has actually met with Prime Minister Netanyahu.
11) We are supposed to care that Romney outsourced some jobs in his private business ventures, but we should ignore that 7 of 10 GM jobs are now overseas.
12) Nearly every endeavor Romney has attempted has been successful, and Obama had Solydra, but you act like it never happened.
13) Romney followers supposedly have some sort of secret racist language, although no one seems to know it, yet Biden. . . Really? He gets a pass on actual racist comments, and not just once but continually. Really?
14) The American people are supposed to thin down and eat better because it is costing us all in healthcare costs, but Obama can smoke because it's legal, and what, because he's thin?
15) The polls are all +D by 6-13% but you report them as though they are an actual snapshot of the electorate.
16) Media Matters colluding with the White House on how to spin the news. What?
You are making me tired, and ashamed of the profession. Why don't you all just state what side of the fence you're clinging to, and we can choose who to listen to based on our own bias? Because with reporting like this, you will never change the world.
And this is why I only listen to Glenn Beck now. You are so right on, with all of this. All of it. The other point I would have made as well, no one called out Obama for not making time for Netanyahu to go on Letterman. That is just disgusting.
ReplyDeleteRochelle the title of this blog post leads one to believe you were going to talk about the importance that unbiased journalism has on our republic. Then you go into a rant that is completely biased. I don't think your point was made. I do however believe you are an informed individual that has very strong political convictions. I'm guessing that the treatment of Romney the last couple of days has angered you to no end. Rochelle the guy brought it on himself. Anytime a political figure segregates large portions of the populations and points a finger and says they're the problem. There is going to be backlash.
ReplyDeleteBob, I actually have less problem with the most recent coverage of the 47% comment than any of it. But I am VERY tired of Obama getting a pass. If the press wants to vet Mitt- fine, but they don't vet Obama. They never have. I also also have a big problem with the media defending free speech whenever it suits them but never if the opinion is different from theirs. And fundraising and wearing Obama t-shirts for a journalist? Big big no no!
Deleteadditionally, I take issue with the media acting like Mitt was saying that he doesn't care about the 47%. It was very clear that he meant that he wasn't worried about trying to get their votes; he was talking strategy. Well, duh. If the media wants to complain that Obama's "you didn't build that" comments were taken out of context, then they need to provide context for Romney. They took 1-2 min. out of that tape and have admitted that.
DeleteAnd I didn't even mention the reporters caught colluding to all ask Mitt the same question, because I actually don't think that is such a big deal. They look stupid and inept, but not criminal. However, it is a bad reporter that falls in line and asks the exact same question that the previous 6 reporters have asked.
I will accept that Fox is slightly right and MSNBC is slightly left. I thought CNN was more fair, but the actions of their journalists have proven me wrong. I want an actual journalist who will be fair. There are a few. Wolf Blitzer, for instance tries to be very fair, as does Brett Bair. But I am tired of spin.
I don't think he was saying that he doesn't care about the 47% so much as that the 47% doesn't care for themselves or take any responsibility for themselves. That they view themselves as victims. And that's not taken out of context. As part of the 47% who will be voting for Obama, I can tell you that I have never taken food, housing, or anything else from our government (aside from things we all enjoy - public schools, police & fire services, roads, etc.) that is as personally offended as I have ever been by a politician on a national scale. I don't agree with lots of things other people say or do, but I would never go so far as to insult them for having a different opinion. Romney clearly did.
DeleteAlso, I agree that your point would have been much better made had you, yourself, been somewhat neutral in your rhetoric and examples. As it is, it's such a one sided piece that although I presume you're not a journalist, you're just as biased as those you rail against.
DeleteI can see how you could think that. I do not agree, but I can see how you get there. However, it still doesn't excuse the press for their coverage of the overall campaigns. The event you are talking about is a different debate and a debate worth having. :)
Deletealso, I am a blogger, not a journalist, but yes I do have some journalism training. This is why I am infuriated. And yes, I am coming from one perspective, but keep in mind, the title itself is a bit on irony.
DeleteAnd Bob, why is it not just as wrong for Obama to point a finger at the "rich" and the "fat cats" and say "it's their fault." Come on, it's a combination, we all know that. I just want them to point it out on BOTH sides. It's not too much to ask.
DeleteVery well written Rochelle! I think you are hitting the nail on the head with this one! It is very frustrating & disappointing to even listen to the journalists of today. Your last sentence is spot on! Nice to know someone else feels this way! You should totally send this in to newspapers as a "letter to the editor"!
ReplyDeleteAMEN!!! I am completely frustrated at seeing posts about Romney that he is such a villain, and here is the clip that proves it. Only to click on the clip and listen and KNOW IMMEDIATELY that it is a SOUND BITE taken completely out of context. How is America ever supposed to vote for an actual leader if the media is intent on skewing the truth and leading those who are not informed to make an unwise decision. I truly feel that in this presidential election the only way one is going to get any actual and factual information pertaining to a candidate is to kneel and pray to whatever greater power they so choose!!
ReplyDeleteI agree.
ReplyDeleteYep bias crap mainstream media its so obvious! http://darinscott.blogspot.com/2012/09/open-mic-press-coordinates-romney.html
ReplyDeleteRochelle you know me well enough to know I have a lot more to say.;-). I will keep it short because I'm driving. When did Obama point a finger at the wealthy? Wanting to raise taxes on the wealthy because their rates are at an all time low isn't pointing a finger. It's one aspect of his plan to balance the budget. It happens to be one aspect of it that Mitt takes exception to because he and those he wishes to represent are the ones that will feel the effects.
DeleteBob, he has demonized the wealthy for the last 3 years. He has called them "fat cats" numerous times. And yes, I know you do have a lot more to say. But that is why I like to discuss it with you. You are able to do so without being rude. :) However my point in this was about the lopsided press coverage, not the merits of the arguments on each side.
ReplyDeleteRochelle,
ReplyDeleteThank you for taking the time to articulate what I have been thinking for a long time. I agree that the news is biased. Why was the attention on what Romney said instead of on what Obama failed to do in Libya. No marines, no hardened outer wall on 9/11 and with the area heating up lately. Because they did not have specific chatter they don't need to do anything? Where are the questions on any of this? Obama's foreign policy of appeasement and "reaching out" is a total failure, yet the polls show people overwhelmingly think he is better with foreign policy. The only way this can be explained is that the media is feeding this opinion.
Very well said, Young Patriot! Your eye for detail is excellent & you've recognized some of the many reasons I've coined the term "Obama Jihadi media" for these Obama Campaign Staffers we laughingly refer to as reporters/media!" Like the Muslim Jihadis, if you don't hit them back hard, you only encourage & embolden them for their next attack!
ReplyDeleteGod Bless America!
Rochelle
ReplyDeleteI share your sentiments totally. I linked in from Paratisi who expresses a solution to what you've diagnosed so accurately: a hypocritical media.
More Breitbart and new media like your site is the alternative obvious to me regarding the corrupt national media.
As for the local news, I'll get my weather, sports and puppy stories from the news readers (journalits?)but to heck with their news/politics. The station owners are all corporations marching in lockstep with the liberal sentiment here in the purple state of CO.
Keep up the great work!