Rush Limbaugh Live Thread Monday Dec 4th, 2006

Rush Limbaugh | 12-04-2006

[MNJohnnie]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1747605/posts

Communication Professor Examines Media Bias in President's Speeches Virginia Tech News ^ | 11/30/06 | Jean Elliott

Posted on 12/02/2006 5:28:58 PM CST by LS

BLACKSBURG, VA., November 30, 2006 -- Jim A. Kuypers, assistant professor of communication in the College of Liberal Arts and Human Sciences at Virginia Tech, reveals a disturbing world of media bias in his new book Bush's War: Media Bias and Justifications for War in a Terrorist Age (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. 2006).

Convincingly and without resorting to partisan politics, Kuypers strongly illustrates in eight chapters “how the press failed America in its coverage on the War on Terror.” In each comparison, Kuypers “detected massive bias on the part of the press.” In fact, Kuypers calls the mainstream news media an “anti-democratic institution” in the conclusion.

“What has essentially happened since 9/11 has been that Bush has repeated the same themes, and framed those themes the same whenever discussing the War on Terror,” said Kuypers, who specializes in political communication and rhetoric. “Immediately following 9/11, the mainstream news media (represented by CBS, ABC, NBC, USA Today, New York Times, and Washington Post) did echo Bush, but within eight weeks it began to intentionally ignore certain information the president was sharing, and instead reframed the president's themes or intentionally introduced new material to shift the focus.”

This goes beyond reporting alternate points of view. “In short,” Kupyers explained, “if someone were relying only on the mainstream media for information, they would have no idea what the president actually said. It was as if the press were reporting on a different speech.”

The book is essentially a “comparative framing analysis.” Overall, Kuypers examined themes about 9-11 and the War on Terror that the President used, and compared them to the themes that the press used when reporting on what the president said.

“Framing is a process whereby communicators, consciously or unconsciously, act to construct a point of view that encourages the facts of a given situation to be interpreted by others in a particular manner,” notes Kuypers.

At the heart of each chapter are these questions: What did President Bush talk about, and how did he want us to think about it? What did the mainstream news media talk about following president Bush’s speeches, and how did they want us to think about it?

According to Arkansas State University’s Dennis W. White, a retired lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army, "This is a time of maximum danger for our country—a time of crisis. The American people historically turn to the President during these times for explanation, for comfort, and for exhortation to purpose. Yet, the President does not speak directly to the people. His speech is mediated; he speaks through the media, members of the media comment on presidential speech, and others comment on the comment. Jim Kuypers is the best in the business at explaining presidential crisis communication and its relationship to the media.”

"This is a skilled and thoughtful work of scholarship, well worth a careful reading,” said Stephen D. Cooper of Marshall University. “Kuypers's book is provocative in the best sense of the word: It can stimulate fresh thinking about presidential rhetoric and press reporting of it—which Kuypers shows can be two very different things.”

Kuypers, of Christiansburg, Va., received his Ph.D from Louisiana State University and both his bachelor’s degree and master’s degree from Florida State. He joined Virginia Tech's Department of Communication last year after having taught political communication for tens years at Dartmouth College

[rottndog]

From Wikipedia:

Moonbat (also "barking moonbat") is a term often used as a political epithet. Some Iraq War supporters use it to insult opponents like Noam Chomsky and Pat Buchanan. More generally, it is used as a pejorative for extremists, especially those who believe in conspiracy theories.


That pretty well sums it up. On FR on the talk show threads, it's someone who gets on the air with the host who is obviously way off the deep end to the left--someone who is emotional rather than logical.

Calling out a MOONBAT is often accomplished with a picture:


Anything else you need to know, just ask. Plenty of FReepers here will gladly help you out.

[rottndog]

Yeah, I got it.

That's how I got pinged back to this thread.

I don't know how concerned Lincoln was with the electoral map, but I have seen quotes from him where he didn't believe the slaves (or former slaves) could live side by side with Americans.

I don't think that makes him a racist, as he was a very religious man and ethical mores of the times were much different than they are today.

[Mo1]

are you the caller?

[Mo1]

it would explain alot

[HarmlessLovableFuzzball]

Lincoln did the right thing? Under what conditions is violating the US Constitution, the "right thing?"

Are you a secessionist kook ? Did you sign up on FR today to post your kookery in response to Rush's comments ? Were you the caller from Shreveport ?

[Eagle of Liberty]

I just bought both of your books. I plan on doing a lot more reading and a lot less TV watching over the next two years.

[LS]

LOL. I hope to watch more TV and write less.