There is no Liberal Media. There is no Conservative Media.

[Taverner]

But there is a Media "Business"

Among the Freepers, they accuse the News Media of being run by Liberals. They haven't tired of this old schtick and they won't anytime soon. Among some of us, there is the idea that there is a Conservative bias in the news.

Neither is correct - at least in the political sense. The owners of the Media Giants (save Murdoch) have no interest in politics unless it affects their bottom line. That includes the business of "selling news."

The media was gung-ho about the Iraq Invasion because, hell, viewership goes up during a war. That war, with its embedded reporters, was planned, executed and managed by the Media - and by the media I do not mean the reporters or the editors, but the "X-level" folks. Executives and Presidents.

In short, War sells, and everybody's buying. We were just as guilty when we turned in to CNN to see the war unfold. CNN, FOX, MSNBC, etc got to plaster advertisments at us non stop, and made money off us all, whether we supported the war or not.

Now I'm not going to go as far as saying the media "supported" President, then-Candidate Obama during the election. But they did give him much more favorable coverage than Kerry, Gore or Clinton. Why? Again, the bottom line - Obama sells. Pepsi knows this - Just look at their new logo. Even though every day I am reminded how big of a bullet we dodged with mccain/PALIN! - but the media didn't give Obama fairer coverage because they thought he was best for the Country. They did it because they can market and sell Obama. He's a brand to them.

And this brings me to Dubya. They DID give him preferential treatment in the media. Even though he was obviously an idiot - in fact, exactly because he was an idiot. Again, Bush sold, even if it was bad news. Even if it was Bush doing something incredibly stupid, people tuned in just to bury their face in their hands.

So in essence, there is no liberal or conservative media - only a Media Business, who wishes to (1) sell ads to their sponsors, (2) get more people to watch the news and (3) keep the public from having a negative view of corporations, despite what they do.



Anyway, your thoughts?

[sandyj999]

1. It is attempting to be the Brainwashing media. n/t

[Taverner]

2. Public Relations, Propaganda, Advertising all have the same root

Edward Bernays, the father of Public Relations

And yes, that was his stated goal, because he felt the public was too stupid, and needed corporations to "sway public opinion"

Read about him some day - big influence for Hitler, Stalin, Reagan and Rove.

[Deja Q]

3. No argument here; they do whatever to get ratings and ratings ultimately equals money.

Why else do people still tune into Jerry Springer's one-hour, one-note sleaze-fest after 15 years of it? It sells.

Apolitical is a gross understatement.