Posted on 12/26/2001 4:59:29 AM PST by PJ-Comix
Confronting liberal bias as it occurs. Last week when CNN's Aaron Brown set up an interview segment by tagging Shelby Steele as "a conservative," but simply describing Richard Cohen as "a columnist," Steele called him on it, forcing Brown to concede that Cohen is a liberal.
MRC analyst Ken Shepherd caught the incident which occurred on the December 18 NewsNight. Brown set up the segment on the 10pm EST show: "There was that remarkable meeting a few weeks back in the prison in Mazar-e Sharif of two young men -- and to some, two different cultures. Two different American cultures. CIA officer Mike Spann, a former Marine, a child of small-town Alabama, whose family said he always wanted to serve his country. And in that prison, before he was killed, he met John Walker, a 20-year-old from Marin County, California, fighting with the Taliban, whose parents sent him to an alternative school, supported his conversion to Islam, and allowed him to travel across the world to pursue his new religion. Some conservatives jumped on Walker, saying he is a product of cultural liberalism -- the California kind -- helping to turn an impressionable kid against his own country.
"Joining us from Salinas, California, one of those conservatives, Shelby Steele of the Hoover Institution. Mr. Steele wrote a provocative article the other day in the Wall Street Journal -- a column in the Journal. And here in New York, a columnist who thinks Mr. Steele is making an awfully broad generalization: Richard Cohen of the Washington Post. It's nice to have both of you here. Mr. Steele."
Steele protested: "First of all, let me interrupt you just a minute."
Brown: "Okay."
Steele queried: "Is Richard Cohen a liberal?"
Brown: "Yeah, Richard Cohen's a liberal. I think he would say that, wouldn't he?"
Steele: "Just wanted to make sure we were both-"
Cohen reluctantly admitted: "On this issue."
Brown: "On this issue. Okay. Everyone is now branded, I guess." Steele reasonably suggested: "Okay, great. If I'm going to be, everybody's going to be."
Brown proceeded to recall an earlier assessment by a conservative which many reporters did not appreciate: "Let me try and get, let me try and get a little control back. A few years back, Newt Gingrich blamed liberalism for Susan Smith's decision to kill her own children in South Carolina. And I think when some people hear the argument you're making they're thinking about that and that seemed a bit of a stretch then. Are they, are these different issues or is this the same thing?"
Steele has provided an excellent model for the new year for how conservative guests on TV shows can correct liberal bias on the fly. -- Brent Baker, trapped with unlabeled liberals in Taxachusetts
This report came to me via e-Mail but it will soon appear on the MRC.ORG website.
Here are sources for Media bias:
-Media Research-free e-letter--
-Reed Irvine's Accuracy in Media--
As I stated before I am more than willing to take the Katie Couric Challenge. Mute the sound on the TV set, blot out the identity of the interviewee, and I can determine with 100% accuracy whether the guest is a liberal or a conservative simply by looking at the expression on Katie's face. Here is the formula:
Liberal Guest=Looks of adulation beaming from Katie's adoring eyes.
Conservative Guest=Angry glares emanating from Katie's scowling face.
Good for him! This is exactly the kind of sneakiness we have to root out and expose. In one of my grad school courses, we had to read some cultural anthropologists bullsh** drivel about how science is merely another worldview, a Western construct. The article read, "whereas the scientist claims to explain the world as it 'really' is, the anthropologist studies the various ways in which..." and I made sure to point out to the prof the bias of this style. The scientist "claims" but the anthropologist "studies." And of course, the scare quotes around "really." (After all, there IS no objective reality, see? Although when you use that against them to say that their collectivist world-view is, then, no better than a capitalist one, they get very prune-faced.)
CCRM is a Free Republic Network affiliate working to reduce media bias.
For a comprehensive overview of Freeper thoughts on Liberal Media bias, check out our website by clicking on graphic, or HERE: We call it Fairpress.org.
This thread is evidence that liberal bias is still with us. Come join our in the battle against the Liberal Media.
Exactly. And it also leads an uninformed viewer to conclude that CNN actually gives conservatives lots of airtime, thus blunting the charges that CNN is biased to the left.
At least Shelby Steele is a true conservative. What fries me is when they have people like Tucker Carlson or Billy Kristol on and paint them as extreme right-wingers. They are moderates at best.
prambo
VOTE with your REMOTE! Fox Rocks!
I'm glad to see that Shelby Steele called the CNN interviewer to account for the labeling of him as a "conservative" while not giving a political label to Cohen who is a liberal leftist. This is a common tactic on most media news---Label a conservative as such but decline to label a liberal leftist as a liberal leftist. What this does is instill in the viewer's (or reader's) mind that the conservative has a political agenda while the unlabeled liberal leftist is an unbiased source without a poltical agenda. I only hope that more conservatives do as Shelby Steele has done and call any interviewers to account on this poltical labeling technique.
My point is that the Left has hijacked the term "liberal" to describe their totally un-liberal socialist agenda. America was founded as a "liberal" country in the true sense of the word. Madison, Jefferson, et al. were "liberals".
Let's make a point to avoid using the term "liberal", until we have restored its traditional meaning of individual freedom and liberty: the precepts upon which this country was founded and what made it great.
Absolutely. I didn't see this episode because I don't watch CNN, NBC, ABC, or CBS, except for local news broadcasts at 6:00 and 10:00.
For national news, it's Fox all the way ... but for pure fiction, I'll take the westerns channel, not liberal-biased media.
The point is that Aaron Brown is, at heart, just another elite white leftist -- and from time to time, it slips out.
This is one of the first things that Bernard Goldberg addresses in "Bias."
Aaron Brown has risen very quickly for no discernible reason. I remember not too long ago he was one of the anchors on ABC World News Now, the overnight headline show that fills in the gap between Politically Incorrect and Good Morning America. It's a loose, informal show, the anchors jibe with each other, and they have their own goofy theme song that makes fun of the corporate stiffs. I didn't know what a lefty he was until he started filling in for whoever would normally would fill in for whoever would normally fill in for Ted Koppel, and he would pull stuff like he almost did with Steele.
Actually, this is a true statement.
Except that the scientific worldview produces actual results (unlike most non-scientifically based worldviews) and can therefore be safely assumed to provide the best available explanation of reality.
It's nice that someone recognizes that science is a Western construct. For a while there I was thinking it was invented in Darkest Africa. :)
Yeah, unfortunately you're right about that.
Replace conservative with "neo-con" (as in "We're for smaller government: we'll only increase spending 5%; that's less than the 7% the Dems want") and that usually 'bout sums it up.
Amen. Just consider: how often does the media make references to "right-wing" as if no corresponding "left-wing" views exist in America? In their lexicon, there is: right-wing, extreme right-wing, conservative, moderate, independent, and liberal. There is no left in American politics, if you read their reports.
I woke up to two ridiculous front-page headlines in my local paper (Duluth, Minn News-Tribune) this morning:
"Analysts say tax increases are better option than spending cuts for economic stimulus"
and
"On anniversary, many Russians regret collapse of the Soviet Union"
I'd post the content of the articles, but I presume that most of you, like me, aren't interested in going beyond the headline.
Another trick is Brokaw's FLEECING OF AMERICA which he started, I believe, after the Republicans took control of the House and Senate. He would show some government action that is wasting millions of dollars and state it was passed by Congress. Failing to mention it was passed by Congress 10/20/30 years ago whent the Dems were in charge. Then he would show something the Republicans in Congress would want to do.
Sometimes it is subtle, sometimes it smacks you right across the face.
The media seldom criticizes what Tom Daschle says, they are too busy describing how he says it.
"Style Over Substance" from both sides of the camera is a serious disservice to truth, but that's what we get.
Liberal Guest=Looks of adulation beaming from Katie's adoring eyes.
Conservative Guest=Angry glares emanating from Katie's scowling face.
In all seriousnes, that would be a good combination Political Science/Psych project for a Conservative college student to undertake.
The muted video tapes can be shown to Psych majors who are simply asked, in their opinion, judging solely by Katie's facial expressions, if Katie is showing hostility, approval or neutrality. The subject matter must also be taken into account. For example, Katie might scowl when talking to a Liberal if they are both agreeing that George Bush is ruining the country. The Psych students will know nothing else about the subect of the study so it would be a "blind" study.
A Political Science student who also knows nothing of the purpose of the study is later instructed to state, "What is Katie discussing at this point of the tape". The study now is "double blind".
After the data is collected, the identity of the interviewed guests and the topic of conversation that illicited the facial reaction can be matched up with the facial expression answers to obtain the final results.
Anyone know any college students out there willing to do this little project? Armitage?
I absolutely think this is a TERRIFIC college project. Anybody out there connected with a college or university? Please read the project proposal by Polybius.
You are 100% correct. The hijacking of the term "liberal" and the hijacking of the Democrat Party by the Marxist Left is documented in Horowitz's book, Radical Son. I support your point about using terms. In this respect, John Kennedy was a Liberal, anti-communist American; Hillary Clinton is a Marxist. Let's call things as they are.
Only through Science and Technology, Western Civilization came to be the dominant culture of the world. 400 years ago, all cultures were more or less equally dominant.
"Neo-cons" are actually Democrats purged from that party when it was overrun by Marxists.
Not entirely true. 400 (really 500-600) years ago, the Muslim, Chinese, Indian (Mogul) and European civilizations were on an approximately level playing field. This was at a level that had not changed dramatically for thousands of years. Western Civ took off from that point, leaving all others in the dust. As you point out, this was mainly due to technology.
But why did WC develop science when others (notably China), despite a big early lead, did not? Very interesting subject.
Brown spent a lot of time on the Seattle locals before moving on, that pretty much explains it.
I actually like the fact that Jeff Cohen is on Fox. He is a liberal and is labeled as such. He isn't portrayed as just some neutral commentator as he would be on other networks. I don't mind if conservatives are labeled as conservatives as long as liberals are labeled as liberals.
Good point, but I still despise the little varmint!
Anyhow, Seasons Greetings!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.