Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Media manipulation ? : Spiegel Poll: Hillary ahead of Trump in all key states

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    What I'd be interested in seeing is a breakdown of positive to negative articles published in say the last 90 days about Trump and Clinton...

    I'm willing to bet articles about Trump have been overwhelmingly negative while those about Clinton were mostly neutral or positive.
    I actually did a study about the tone of media bias by the media last year. It was a small sample run, but I'm considering expanding it out, or at least narrowing the focus.

    The funny thing is that Fox News actually lends itself to more examination because its search engine is actually decent and it posts (many of) its transcripts.

    Trying to compare Fox to CNN is a pain in the ass because of how terrible CNN's search engine is when looking for specific phrases within a certain time-frame.

    Still, you don't have to look too far to see public perception of the media is powerful enough. A good example I remember is from the 2008 elections.

    When Obama was running against McCain, the public perception of Obama's coverage was very even - roughly a third thought he was treated favorably, neutrally, and negatively by the media during the election.

    However, perception of McCain was overwhelming thought of as negative (something like 60% there), with few people thinking it was positive overall.

    That actually ties back into one of the problems identifying "media bias" - the bias can often be subtle and, in this case, much more about what isn't said than what is. Going by public perception, Obama was treated evenly and fairly by the mainstream media - not favored, but not attacked. McCain on the other hand was treated much more negatively, meaning that the bias in favor of Obama really didn't represent itself in overwhelming praising of Obama but just more targeted negative coverage of McCain.

    The same has been documented in media coverage of think tanks - conservative ones are routinely questioned more about their bias and credentials than liberal ones.

    Leave a comment:


  • Grognard Gunny
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    What I'd be interested in seeing is a breakdown of positive to negative articles published in say the last 90 days about Trump and Clinton...

    I'm willing to bet articles about Trump have been overwhelmingly negative while those about Clinton were mostly neutral or positive.
    No Bet!

    GG

    Leave a comment:


  • SRV Ron
    replied
    Manipulation of the news has been going on even before William Randal Hurst drag the country into a war with Spain. Back then, it was called Yellow Journalism.

    Leave a comment:


  • MarkV
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
    Can't we do better than these two?
    Funny I tend to find myself with similar thoughts every four years "Can't you do better than this shower?" but then didn't someone once say "anyone who is prepared to do what it takes to become president is probably unfit to hold the office" Richard Condon I think

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    What I'd be interested in seeing is a breakdown of positive to negative articles published in say the last 90 days about Trump and Clinton...

    I'm willing to bet articles about Trump have been overwhelmingly negative while those about Clinton were mostly neutral or positive.
    I haven't see much positive written about either one. Then I don't believe there is much positive to write about those two. #1 #2

    Can't we do better than these two?

    Leave a comment:


  • Salinator
    replied
    Originally posted by Konzev View Post
    Angela Merkel would love to work with Hillary, the corporate media blasting the headlines like an oiled propaganda machine.

    http://www.spiegel.de/politik/auslan...a-1085220.html
    Konzev,

    You will need to provide at the very least a brief summary in English of any article that you choose to post that is in any language other than English.

    This is an issue that ACG Staff has been far too lenient in the pass. We will no longer look the other way.

    Your cooperation shall be most appreciated by both members and ACG Staff.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    When it comes to Trump and the Progressive Left and MSM, what I see is they're acting like this:

    The 'charge women with a crime that have an abortion' from last week is an example of how the media manipulates news.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    When it comes to Trump and the Progressive Left and MSM, what I see is they're acting like this:

    Leave a comment:


  • 101combatvet
    replied
    Well, they were wrong about the Great Obama.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
    Couldn't be that they are also looking to be victim just like BLM.

    Some come up and say from the start, I'm a Jew. SO, bmfd, I could care less if it was worth the effort.
    Everyone can be a victim. But being a victim is a short-term answer. When you're trying to build a business, playing the victim card doesn't do much.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arnold J Rimmer
    replied
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post
    And what is the source of Der Spiegel ? Maybe CNN, BBC, NYT and other truth loving instititions ?
    Not to mention DS is hardly an unbiased publication.

    The primaries are not over. The time to start comparing Hillary and Trump begins after them, not during.

    Right now this is just liberals whistling past the graveyard.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    What I'd be interested in seeing is a breakdown of positive to negative articles published in say the last 90 days about Trump and Clinton...

    I'm willing to bet articles about Trump have been overwhelmingly negative while those about Clinton were mostly neutral or positive.

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    My relatives still get some passive antisemitism when working with international companies.
    Couldn't be that they are also looking to be victim just like BLM.

    Some come up and say from the start, I'm a Jew. SO, bmfd, I could care less if it was worth the effort.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by Konzev View Post
    As a Jew, I find Your grouping offensive.
    You should, just like I am. However, the idea of a Jewish dominated corporate media still persists. It's the same old arguments we've seen for generations. Thankfully it's starting to die off, but not entirely. My relatives still get some passive antisemitism when working with international companies.

    ... Nothing of which has to do with the polls or differences in voter investment, which was part of my suggestion about why poll numbers could be artificially inflating the predicted vote against Trump.

    Come on, your countries promoters, and media learned a lot from Leni Riefenstahl, admit it, She was brilliant. Juust watch ``Triumph of the will``
    Why country hasn't? That's like trying to accuse another state of malfeasance because their media took cues from "Birth of a Nation".

    Leave a comment:


  • Konzev
    replied
    Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
    It's part of the Corporate-Jewish-CIA media conspiracy, of course. That's why so many polls from so many different organizations have said the same thing. It's all media manipulation to serve their ruling interests.
    As a Jew, I find Your grouping offensive.

    Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
    Or maybe instead of a conspiracy its because the polls are asking average Americans and not likely voters at a time when the GOP are fired up and the Democrats are both tired and disheartened, meaning the polls represent popular opinion but not voter opinion.
    Blablablah:
    Registered lobbyists raised more money for the Democrat Hillary Clinton than for any other presidential candidate of either party during the three months ending in December, according to reports filed with the Federal Election Commission.
    http://www.nytimes.com/politics/firs...obbyists/?_r=0

    Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
    No, nothing so banal could be true. It has to be Nazi-esque propaganda.
    Come on, your countries promoters, and media learned a lot from Leni Riefenstahl, admit it, She was brilliant. Juust watch ``Triumph of the will``

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X