My very dear friend (of over 30 years) and I got into a heated debate the other night. The topics ranged from the situation in the middle east and then ventured into the political spectrum here at home. For close to two hours there were ebbs and tides of innuendoes, emotions, statements of fact, and (sometimes) out-right absurbities. When my friend (he preferred the moniker of "Highmoon") finally stated that there was no media bias, I went through the roof----almost literally. After I came down from my tirade, and gathered my emotions, I suggested we put Highmoon's statements concerning media bias to an online post and solicit other-wise calmer opinions. While my friend does not use the term MSM through-out our conversation, he does insinuate the term by his framed statement below.
How is the media perceived by our society today? This question would have to be divided into two separate notions----our own national media and the worlds media. While they are both intertwined in forming our opinions, please specify when you are framing your comments.
Highmoon says: "It is not a left (liberal) biased media, it a economic biased media."
Here's where my blood pressure rose (briefly) and I needed to frame his statement so I could understand where he was going with this. I also told him that I believed there was a definite liberal media bias and it is loaded with distortions and is agenda driven to destroy conservative thought and reasoning. I also told Highmoon that I felt the liberal medias bias played far too much of a part in framing the election process in our nation.
In replying to Highmoon's original statement I asked:
Rovin: "Should this be framed as a question or a statement of fact? I need to know if you believe there is no media bias.
Highmoon (from Highmoon Dances) says: "The media sells what people buy.The media that we financally support thru purchasing the products of advertisers, or the access to the media itself, sells us what we want to hear."
While this statement may have some truths unto itself, I felt that Highmoon was dancing a bit away from his original thought. I explained that while I do read the liberal media's "output", I rarely agree with what is written as truthful and unbiased. Case in point was the recent "world-wide" story released by the Associated Press that six sunnis were dragged out into the street, doused with kerosene, and burned alive. I put the emphasis on "world-wide" because over 90% of the worlds media printed this story as if it actually was factual, when it is still being disputed by many that this NEVER HAPPENED, AND WAS A TOTAL FABRICATION, created by AP through sources that to this day are still in question. (links here and here)
Highmoon is not here now, and therefore can not defend or comment on the direction of this debate. So I will put it up here for discussion, and allow him to comment when a computer is available to him. In the meantime feel free to supply your input.
(note: I should include that our original 2 hour argument started with discussing the state of our involvement in the middle east and the ongoing debate of what should and can be done. Highmoon does believe that it was a total error for our President to remove Saddam Hussein from power. He also has expressed the belief that this "removal" was based only for the purpose of controlling the oil fields in the region to line the pockets of the Presidents "buddies". While I would agree to some extent that the control and the free flow of oil in the middle east is critical to our national and economic security, I do not believe that our President started a this war for the soul purpose of lining his buddies pockets. While this premise may be debatable, (and I think it has little merit), I would prefer that we keep this discussion (for the most part) on the media's involvement in national and world affairs, and how it has impacted all of us.)
Have at it!