Actually, journalism used to be much more biased. The concept of the objective and unbiased journalist is a relatively recent phenomenon, dating from the early middle of the 20th century. Before that, the press was openly baised, usually in favor of the political leanings of owner of the publication. We don’t need reforms. We need better options.

I had a similar idea while back proposing we get a wealthy conservative to buy out at least one of the existing news networks, fire all the national news staff AND the local affiliate stations staffs and replace them all with REAL journalists.

You could begin with FOX. The main HQ is already somewhat on our side, but the FOX local affiliates are just as bad as CNN. If we could takeover all the FOX affiliates, that would be a start.

Looking to cable TV or new media is not the answer to the problem. Our friends who have cable TV have made FOX cable news very popular and we already have their votes. People who don’t have cable TV probably don’t have access to new media also and they are a big chunk of voters living in inner city who watch liberal propaganda media every night and vote democrat because there is no outlet in their face dispelling the lies. It is these minds we need to change with the truth and the facts that prove their saviors are phonies.

Reform the media??? Sorry, it’s too far gone from the top on down. A new generation of journalists and editors would be required to report only the facts and the real effects of gov’t policies and actions. I might even go so far as to ban opinionated pundit style editorials such as the Charles Jaco report on the local FOX news station. Blehhh…that guy is clearly a socialist.

Yeah, me too. Point 5, fourth from last paragraph.

http://www.redstate.com/Flagstaff/2012/12/31/the-state-of-the-union-message-that-will-not-be-presented-in-january/

Maybe it isn’t too late. I believe there will be another election in a year or so. Heh.

When I started putting keyboard to pixel here way back when, if I mentioned media bias or the fact that we had a steeper hill to climb to get our message across, I usually got some agreement, but always also a good amount of push-back. “Its a fact of life.” “We have won anyway, haven’t we?” “The truth comes out in the end.” That kind of thing. Maybe even the occasional, “Stop whining.” But then, as now, my intention was to point out that the playing field isn’t level, and that it matters.

It seems that very few people argue with that idea now, or perhaps I should say, pooh-pooh it. University research documents it. Even the MSM has been forced to acknowledge that it exists, although it’ll be a cold day in Bangkok before any of them admits HE is guilty of it.

I’m not happy that very few of our candidates take any care to confront it, but some of them do, unfortunately only at campaign time. We need to do more than improve our messages, as Ben Howe points out in “It’s the Messaging, Stupid. It’s the Stupid Messaging.” I say we must improve our messaging to counteract media bias. To my mind, that includes improving the manner in which we make public statements. They need to be made so that they can’t be ignored and they can’t be spun, at least we should be trying to do that.

That was a suggestion I made to John McCain on this website in 2008. Unfortunately, he apparently didn’t get it read to him. (^:^) Do you remember how candidate Obama got good news reported about him every day, and candidate McCain only made the news when he was rebutting something that he was accused of doing or being?

Media bias isn’t just bad for us. It’s bad for the country. I’ll be writing about that pretty soon. I hope David Freddoso has already made the same point, only better, in his book.

One way to start is for each of us to do our part to starve the beast. Do not watch ABC / CBS / NBC news — no doubt your cable companies track what channels /shows are watched, and relay this information to advertisers. (Even consider not watching the programming of their sponsoring networks.)

Don’t subscribe to the “mainstream media” newspapers (NYT, Washington Post, indeed most newspapers). When they call to ask you to subscribe, refuse and tell them why.

Do start patronizing “alternative media” — Redstate, Breitbart, Glenn Beck’s “The Blaze” (online and the broadcast entity),

In my state we still have newspapers and they are all online as well as in print form. The make political endorsements and cover news that appears online. There is something about ‘Letters to editor’ still that draws me. Papers are a community focus and dominated by liberal chains whose lead stories and headline unfortunately form opinions as people walk by a newspaper box or subscribe. .

I can think of a few newspapers worthy of saving in Wisconsin that need a boost since papers online or not are how we get news. I would like the right to have the clout of the AP that all carry but that is unrealistic at this time, man!

Milwaukee Sintenel still covers news but Wisconsin State Journal has swung left on social issue but runs canned oped from Dc like Trudy Rubin that pass for conservative voices. Its stale..The Cap times is trah mouth liberal and dominates the last word and forst word far too much

Mega news groups and chains have bought many local TV stations that also run national packets of puff news and do not do well at state and local politics. Local reporters do not have a beat anymore. we need local reports that cover conservatives.

After the recall and Nov 2012 GOP picked up a new Senate seat but the paper hghlights a Walker protester who won a seat. It is time the right is brought out of shadows and humanized with the same kind of info stories liberals get in papers.

yeah I think we should get our papers back as their is a captive audience.

Never use the past tense when discussing how in the tank the Administration Press and the rest of the so-called “main stream media” is for O. They are convinced socialists, and that’s being polite.

We need to fight back. We need to get Stephanouopolos on a billboard with a pithy caption.
Use their faces and names. We need to fight out in public to get LIVs edumacated that the morning shows are soft porn Liberal indoctrination. Get Priebus to use the 4.7 million left over at RNC to destroy— yes destroy— Stepphies, Lauers, Gregory’s, Williams, Todd’s careers. All old white guys. Lets go after them Alinsky style.
They go after us every day. We are constantly, relentlessly being attacked from core beliefs, religion to family.
And do nothing.

Where did the term proglodyte originate and how can we make it more popular? I love it.

Again we all know the media is bias. I have known since the 60′s. A plan to correct it, now that would be news. I suggest ignoring them but two out of three stories today are completely about them. NYT’s is almost our of money. Networks are hurting just stop watching the news. It is a lie and we spend all our time defending against it. Everyday your story should be no one bought the New York Times today. Writers look for work in Obama administration.

There’s a lot of truth there. Many young people get all their news from Comedy Central.

Don’t forget 2008.
On Election day twelve Obama voters were interviewed extensively right
after they voted to learn how the news media impacted their knowledge of
what occurred during the campaign. These voters were chosen for their
apparent intelligence/verbal abilities and willingness to express their
opinions to a large audience. The rather shocking video below seeks to
provide some insight into which information broke through the news media
clutter and which did not.
http://youtu.be/mm1KOBMg1Y8

This sounds EXACTLY like the frustration of the Dems during the Reagan presidency.

It might not be the media per se and it may be that Obama is a master of manipulating the media and Romney & McCain were shown to be amateurs.

It shows a great deal more than that.

Each of these Obama voters, when an act or comment was described to them that indicated deficient character on the part of the candidate, but they did not know which candidate had said or done that, immediately attributed it to Sarah Palin (never correctly.) So, for instance, they were asked which of the candidates had won their first election by having 3 candidates from their own party kicked off the ballot; not only did they NOT know that Obama had done that, most of them, after admitting they did not know, guessed “Sarah Palin.” If it was something that was clearly bad policy, like bankrupting the coal industry, they attributed it to McCain.

Not only did they not know anything about their own candidates, they all seemed eager to attribute bad things to their opponents.