Reply #21: Let's be serious now okay [View All]

[V. Kid]

You're a member of the media, so obviously you would take offence. But the fact is that the media isn't 'fair and balanced' or 'un-biased'. It's disingenuous to pretend that it is. Who bankrolls the Media? Generous philanthropists with a penant for public service? How would you characterize the Aspers? Non-ideological? Do they influence the news departments they own in any way? Do journalists have no opinions or at least precide over news like a Judge?

After that rhetorical interlude the fact remains that the media is composed of human beings, with financial pressures, political preferences and they have editors that have to answer to ownerships with their own agendas. All of this means that more often than not a bias will result from the media. I have no problem with bias persay, I just think the media should acknowledge it -- and there should be various sources and viewpoints reflected. It's essential for a healthy democracy.

Besides you said "I would consider right-wing" -- well that's a value judgement -- others would consider them "right wing" and not just out and out socialists either. By the way, I'm referring to economically right-wing politically -- not socially conservative. So the difference between your accusation that compares my critique to soc-cons who claim bias is that mine is based upon an irrefutable economic argument. I don't think the media has any specific social agenda liberal or conservative but it definitely has a pro-right wing economic agenda -- it's simply logical if one thinks it out.