How desperate has the liberal media become?

[Little-Acorn]

One of the biggest "stories" they've pushed recently (aside from some congressman sending naughty pictures to female acquaintances), is that they have finally gotten a bunch of emails from Sarah Palin's files.

But what was in the emails, wasn't even what made headlines.

They didn't find anything particularly important or controversial in them.

AND THAT IS WHAT MADE THE NEWS!!!

There was nothing in them that they could bash her for. And that was what they considered to be the most important thing!

You can't make this stuff up, folks. Because in a sane world, no one would believe the media would react that way to such a non-story.

:lol:

------------------------------------------

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-06-11/...e-sarah-palin-lamestream-media?_s=PM:POLITICS

Palin e-mails show routine work, running feuds

June 11, 2011
by Matt Smith, CNN

Thousands of pages of e-mail from former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's administration range from the mundane details of governing to efforts to crack down on state news leaks and push back against critics.

Scattered among the 24,000 pages, released by state officials in Juneau on Friday, are glimpses of Palin periodically butting heads with top Alaskan political figures as she pushed to get landmark oil and gas legislation through the statehouse; demanding that Exxon finish paying damages for the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill; even dealing with complaints about high school football rivalries by offering to bake brownies.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

and fox news of course ignored the email right?

its funny you talk about this story, like it was a big story...it was not...over and over again what story did I hear? that there was not much in the emails.

 

[steveox]

They are very liberal. Thats why Larry King lost his job because Sean Hannity is more successful than him. Ratings are very low on NBC NEWS,Ratings are very low on ABC NEWS,Ratings are very low on CBS NEWS and Ratings are very low on CNN and MSNBC. Fox News is #1 in the Ratings.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

They are very liberal. Thats why Larry King lost his job because Sean Hannity is more successful than him. Ratings are very low on NBC NEWS,Ratings are very low on ABC NEWS,Ratings are very low on CBS NEWS and Ratings are very low on CNN and MSNBC. Fox News is #1 in the Ratings.

why is it that fox news junkies think that high ratings means they are correct?

also daily show, gets higher ratings then evry show on Fox News..outside Bill O...

and larry king was ancient he had to step down at some point, also he was boring as hell...and larry king was not news like most news shows...it was long boring interviews often with people no one cares about. Larry King had nothing to do with Sean...

 

[Rick]

This, from the same people who have made a sacred principle of privacy. Once again, one sees the characteristic of leftwingers that is second only to their love of statism - hypocrisy.

 

[Dr.Who]

The herculean efforts made to find any dirt at all on Sarah Palin compated to the virtually nonexistent efforts made to find dirt, and even to ignore of cover up stories about Obama are in fact important news.

In the midsts of a large scandal one might expect reporters to look hard, digging through garbage cans and paying large sums of money to request old e-mails might not even happen then.

Did Fox fail to request the old e-mails - probably because the e-mails of a candidate who is not running anymore and has not announced she will be running now are not important - unless one is desperate to show that the previous failed witch hunts were justified.

Sarah has received so much scrutiny and so little has been found of any import that that fact itself should make her a more desirable candidate.

Meanwhile, tapes of Obama meeting with Palestinians and terrorists before his campaign were intentionally buried. We still have not seen the transcripts from college of the one who is actually in office. The Bill Ayers connection has not been reported well on any msm except fox. The Presidents consistent fudging of reality on his Saturday radio address is ignored. "The Fact Checker" blog for the Washington Post website, described Obama's address as "one of the most misleading collections of assertions we have seen in a short presidential speech. Virtually every claim by the president regarding the auto industry needs an asterisk."

 

[steveox]

why is it that fox news junkies think that high ratings means they are correct?

also daily show, gets higher ratings then evry show on Fox News..outside Bill O...

True because Bill OReilly show is a repeat Daily Show airs 11PM and Colbert Report gets higher Ratings than Jay Leno and Conan OBrian.

 

[Dr.Who]

I might as well post this article here: (which I believe to be evidence that the MSM is becoming less biased since this is from CNN)

"(CNN) -- On Friday afternoon the websites of the five most important newspapers in the United States -- the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, and USA Today -- each had above their digital folds the same breaking story: It seemed the former governor of the 47th-most populous state in the union, a woman who holds no elected office now and almost assuredly will not again anytime soon, had thousands of e-mails from her 21-month tenure data-dumped Video onto the public.

The New York Times responded with a rare burst of interactivity, inviting readers "to point out items of interest." The Washington Post had video, a photo gallery, live updates, and headlines such as "Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin's e-mails show a constant concern with how she is portrayed in the media, on matters big and small."

Transparency advocates doubtlessly breathed a sigh of satisfaction that sunlight-disinfectant was being applied to a government figure. And people with any sense of political proportion were left with an additional thought: When is this journalistic scrutiny going to be applied to politicians who wield actual power?

For instance, one might nominate the president of the United States for such attention. On Saturday, June 4, in his weekly radio address, Barack Obama did what he has consistently done since taking the oath of office: fudged reality to make his policies sound better.

In a premature victory lap over his controversial bailout of Detroit automakers, the president made the highly dubious assertion that not taking over Chrysler and General Motors would have "put a million people out of work," a claim resting on the notion that "bankruptcy" equals "liquidation," which it does not.

Obama on job training and the economy. He said, both presumptively and inaccurately, that "we're making sure America can out-build, out-innovate, and out-compete the rest of the world." And he gave the distinct -- and distinctly false -- impression that Chrysler has repaid every dime of what it owes American taxpayers, mostly by saying "Chrysler has repaid every dime and more of what it owes American taxpayers for their support during my presidency -- and it repaid that money six years ahead of schedule."

Glenn Kessler, who writes "The Fact Checker" blog for the Washington Post website, described Obama's address as "one of the most misleading collections of assertions we have seen in a short presidential speech. Virtually every claim by the president regarding the auto industry needs an asterisk."

A president misleading the public on one of his most crucial policies at a time when Americans are increasingly anxious about the economy sounds kind of newsworthy, no? Well, don't tell the editors of the New York Times -- they were too busy nailing down this important story:"Palin Says She Didn't Err on Paul Revere."

What's particularly odd about the media's disproportionate fascination with Sarah Palin is that it comes coupled with a palpable journalistic fear that we're not challenging Sarah Palin enough.

Three weeks ago, the journalism navel-gazing community was abuzz over an academic study of more than 700 news articles and 20 network news segments from 2009 that addressed a single controversial claim of the health care reform debate.

Was it President Obama's oft-repeated whopper that he was nobly pushing the reform rock up the hill despite the concentrated efforts of health care"special interests?" Was it his oft-repeated promise that "If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan," something that is getting even less true by the minute? Was it the way Obama and the Democrats brazenly gamed and misrepresented the Congressional Budget Office's price-tag scoring of the bill?

No. The cause for Obamacare-coverage reconsideration was not the truth-stretching claims made by a president seeking to radically reshape an important aspect of American life, but rather the Facebook commentary of ... Sarah Palin. "In more than 60 percent of the cases," the authors found, "it's obvious that newspapers abstained from calling [Palin's] death panels claim false." Horrors.

There is no shortage of politicians deserving to have their e-mails combed through, no dearth of urgent stories that could benefit from the kind of journalistic enthusiasm we saw Friday afternoon.

Did you know that a reported dozen armed agents kicked down a guy's door at 6 a.m. this week in Stockton, California, and handcuffed him in his boxer shorts in front of his three bawling pre-teen kids -- to execute a search warrant for the Department of Education involving suspected loan fraud by his allegedly estranged wife? You wouldn't if you get your news from the Sacramento Bee, San Jose Mercury News, San Francisco Chronicle, or L.A. Times, California's biggest newspapers.

But fear not! Now we know that "The 'First Dude' played a particularly influential role in the administration" of a short-term, small-state governor. The lessons for Michelle Obama, then, are clear: If you want the non-Amtrak media to give you attention, they're going to need to hate your husband a little more.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Matt Welch."

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/06/11/welch.palin.email/index.html?hpt=op_t1

I wonder? Are those opinions from Matt solely his at CNN?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

How desperate has the liberal media become?

"Fox News' Bulls and Bears opened its show on Saturday (7/16/11) with a discussion about President Obama's desire to help close the deficit by raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans. Surprise! Surprise! Nearly the entire panel - plus host Brenda Buttner - was in step with Republicans' anti-tax position."

Bulls**t And Bears**t​

​

 

[Openmind]

why is it that fox news junkies think that high ratings means they are correct?

also daily show, gets higher ratings then evry show on Fox News..outside Bill O...

and larry king was ancient he had to step down at some point, also he was boring as hell...and larry king was not news like most news shows...it was long boring interviews often with people no one cares about. Larry King had nothing to do with Sean...

You're correct! Fox News high ratings are easily explained because of their clutching every public television in the U.S.

You go to any emergency room, hospital lobby, waiting rooms, public offices, and Fox News is on. In fact, just 6 months ago, I went to a hospital recruitment center to get some tests, and the TV was on Fox News in the waiting room, with a big sign over it "do not change this chanel!"

A few of us visited a brand new cancer center (we were going to volunteer there), and EVERY TV was on Fox News. . .I heard a very smart comment coming from one of the volunteer. "Great, maybe we should make sure that this channel cannot be changed to CNN!" Now, isn't that "customer friendly," to impose one channel on people stuck in an hospital bed!

Fox News comes free in the basic cable package, many other channels (including MSNBC) do not.

It's working for them. . .the majority of ignorants are brain washed day and night every place they go!

Oh well, at least there are still plenty of people whose brain function well enough to turn off Fox News for something else!

 

[Lagboltz]

Bulls**t And Bears**t​

Great news about Palin. I hope the media keeps the spotlight on her. I hope she wins the nomination and runs against Obama. If not that I hope she runs as a third party candidate.

 

[ProudLefty]

Part of the problem is that Fox News comes from a heritage of tabloid news. Puns for headlines, famous heads on anonymous bodies, gory details of grisly crimes, and tits on page 3.

Regular newspapers have never tried to compete head to head in that market because it is an entirely different market. Now, along comes television, with news shows from a newspaper heritage and it works fine. But then along comes Fox News with a tabloid content, including tits on page 3, and their tabloid newspaper buyers are right there for them.

http://youtu.be/G1qAnx-_LmY

 

[Dr.Who]

You're correct! Fox News high ratings are easily explained because of their clutching every public television in the U.S.

You go to any emergency room, hospital lobby, waiting rooms, public offices, and Fox News is on. In fact, just 6 months ago, I went to a hospital recruitment center to get some tests, and the TV was on Fox News in the waiting room, with a big sign over it "do not change this chanel!"

I recently drove from Il to Fla. Every "public" tv in the North was on CNN and every "public" tv in the south was on Fox. Of course the only thing any of them were showing was coverage of Casey Anthony.