Media Coverage Of Politics

[Jim in CT]

Senator Menendez of New Jersey is a Democrat. He is up to his eyeballs in trouble right now. First, it was reported that a Florida eye surgeon (who has been a big donor to Senator Menendez) took Menendez to the Dominican republic, several times, on his private jet. Senators are required to disclose such things, and compensate the owner of the jet for the going rate for such trips. Menendez didn't disclose his trips until he got caught. It is reported that there were other trips he didn't disclose and pay for. It is also reported that Senator Menendez paid for sex with underage prostitutes in the Dominican Republic (that's just an allegation). It's also reported (and not disputed that I have seen) that Senator Menendez steered a $500 million port security contract to a security company owned by none other than the Florida surgeon who flew the Senator to the Dominican Republic (I'm sure that was just a coincidence).

No one, other than Foxnews, is giving any meaningful time to this story. MSNBC had Senator Menendez on last week to talk about the State of the Union, and incredibly (or maybe predictably) the investigations never came up during his appearance.

All of the news stations are going crazy over the fact that Senator Marco Rubio, a conservative Republican who is literally Public Enemy #1 to liberals for the forseeable future, took an awkward drink of water during his response to the State Of The Union address.

I didn't see Rubio's appearance. But if all the liberal pundits can do is point out that he had the audacity to take a sip of water, I assume there was nothing in his speech that the liberals felt they could refute.

[RIJIMMY]

dont get me started Jimbo....menendez is not even mentioned on CNN however Rubio (note the slow motions shot)......


http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t3#...water-gate.cnn

[buckman]

For the most part liberals are very immature emotionally . They eat this stuff up!! I work in Cambridge. They actually laugh at stuff like this.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

It has been getting some play on the local radio talk but other than that, would never had heard of it...

[buckman]

One think for sure, Everyone knows who Rubio is
Perhaps it was diabolically planned
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

I read a long story about Menendez on nbcnews (i.e. msnbc) and his compliance issues, sorry to have to tell you this.

As for his sleeping with minors, I don't believe that's part of the investigation. A major news outlet probably isn't going to report on it unless there's some credibility. There's a lot that's on Drudge that the mainstream media (including FOX) often doesn't cover because it's just irresponsible until there's real evidence.

-spence

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

. A major news outlet probably isn't going to report on it unless there's some credibility

-spence

Spence, I want to thank you for bringing me to tears with this beauty. You are one funny bastard
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

Spence, I want to thank you for bringing me to tears with this beauty. You are one funny bastard
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Believe it or not they do have standards. Doesn't mean they don't report on some stupid stuff but an allegation with criminal reprocess ions has a very high threshold.

Hey, did you know that guy in your avatar was for gun bans? Just saying...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

Believe it or not they do have standards. Doesn't mean they don't report on some stupid stuff but an allegation with criminal reprocess ions has a very high threshold.

Hey, did you know that guy in your avatar was for gun bans? Just saying...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Hey, go look up the Gun Owners Protection Act . I believe it passed in 86'.
Your wrong but I understand
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

Hey, go look up the Gun Owners Protection Act . I believe it passed in 86'.
Your wrong but I understand
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Reagan supported the FAWB.

-spence

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by spence

Believe it or not they do have standards.

No. They do not. Their only standards are "what panders best to our target audience" and "what furthers the agendas of our executives". Anyone who thinks differently has allowed them to pull the wool over your eyes.

There's a reason I refuse to call them "news organizations". They are nothing more than editorialized, agenda-driven sources for propaganda... all of them.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Believe it or not they do have standards. Doesn't mean they don't report on some stupid stuff but an allegation with criminal reprocess ions has a very high threshold.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Tell that to the Duke lacrosse team whose lives were ruined.

Spence, what you mean to say is, there are high thresholds when the criminal is sympathetic to the liberal agenda.

You don't believe that the underage pristitute thiing is part of the investigation. Which FBI agent told you this? Or are you, as always, dismissive of that which makes your side look immoral and stupid?

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

Believe it or not they do have standards. Doesn't mean they don't report on some stupid stuff but an allegation with criminal reprocess ions has a very high threshold.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I know a certain group of college lacrosse players that would disagree. I also remember several suicides by wrongly accused by the media, individuals.
Your blind faith does however explain a lot of your positions
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

No, I meant Reagan's old age.

-spence

[Jackbass]

I seem to remember a Rather prominent member of CBS reporting a totally false story on GW Bushes military record. Running with the story prior to having authentication. Those are high standards.

Media controls the country IMHO context context context. Everything can be protrayed a certain way given the appropriate sound bytes and video shots etc. it is a way of life. The under informed just go with it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jackbass

I seem to remember a Rather prominent member of CBS reporting a totally false story on GW Bushes military record. Running with the story prior to having authentication. Those are high standards.

So you're suggesting the mainstream media should drop it's standards and embrace a suspect report?

-spence

[Jackbass]

Originally Posted by spence

So you're suggesting the mainstream media should drop it's standards and embrace a suspect report?

-spence

Of course not. I am saying they do. Particularly when it benefits their agenda
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jackbass

Of course not. I am saying they do. Particularly when it benefits their agenda
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Things to slip through the cracks, but that doesn't mean they don't have journalistic standards. I'd note that Rather was pretty much taken down from his throne after that event. Even considering it wasn't a totally false story, but one that had pieces of bad evidence.

-spence

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by spence

Things to slip through the cracks, but that doesn't mean they don't have journalistic standards. I'd note that Rather was pretty much taken down from his throne after that event. Even considering it wasn't a totally false story, but one that had pieces of bad evidence.

-spence

"Journalistic standards" - using this term to describe mainstream media is beyond ridiculous. Every single one of them present agenda-driven, editorialized reporting.

Foxnews, MSNBC and CNN all spend a small percentage of time actually reporting the news and a substantial amount of time setting an emotional response and framing up how their viewers should "feel" about the report. They do not care what the story is, as long as it will appeal their viewers and their viewers will ignore any critical-thinking skills in order to soak up whatever bs opinions are being presented without question.

You seem to be their ideal viewer.

[Jackbass]

Running with a story that is unsubstantiated particularly when it concerns the POTUS lacks integrity. Regardless of who the standing president is.

It is an unfortunate side effect of modern journalism with all of the instantaneous media outlets available to us te days of great news anchors is over. By the time it hits the 6:00 It has already been reported.

I do feel our current mainstream media twist things to their agenda through context and portrayal which is truly what the original argument is.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

The Menendez story is more interesting the more I read about it. Apparently the tip about his cavorting with underage girls has little to no merit. It might not even be politically motivated as much as criminally motivated by some in PR who don't like the influence of his business friend. The FBI has investigated and found nothing behind it.

For all the beotching about the media not covering it I've read plenty on NBC, the NYTimes and Washington Post.

-spence

[PaulS]

another long article yesterday in the NY Times about it.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by PaulS

another long article yesterday in the NY Times about it.

Reporting" nothing to see here, move along" perhaps ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

Reporting" nothing to see here, move along" perhaps ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No, he certainly could have some ethics violations to answer for...

That's the rub, your left wing media is reporting on this story...they're just pushing the credible parts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

No, he certainly could have some ethics violations to answer for...

That's the rub, your left wing media is reporting on this story...they're just pushing the credible parts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And we all know how ethics violations are handled .
Just so you know... I hope he's not guilty of the sexual accusations but these are arrogant powerful and clearly unethical people. I simple don't put anything past them and the "left media" (your words) have a historical past of selective reporting. Not based on credibility but on their own arrogance and agenda.
Fox is as guilty as CNN
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by buckman

Reporting" nothing to see here, move along" perhaps ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So, dod you read it? or ass-u-me-ing?

[buckman]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

So, dod you read it? or ass-u-me-ing?

I don't consider the NYT credible.
That's why I said " perhaps"
Call it an educated guess if you like! . Clever use of dashes 😏
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by buckman

I don't consider the NYT credible.
That's why I said " perhaps"
Call it an educated guess if you like! . Clever use of dashes ��
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So, what do you consider credible media then?

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by buckman

Reporting" nothing to see here, move along" perhaps ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why don't you actually read the articles?

There have been lots of articles in the Times on this. I can show you how to search for them if your interested.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

another long article yesterday in the NY Times about it.

Here's what I was getting at.

The day after the state of the union address, MSNBC showed the clip of Rubio getting a drink of water, more than 100 times.

A few days before, Sen Menendez was on the air at MSNBC with Red Shultz. Schukltz, being the hard-hitting journalist he is, never mentioned Menendez's ethical lapses.

If you point out that the NYT ran a story (or stories), that is certainly relevent. It would be more relevent if you compared the exposure that the NYT gave to the Menendez story, versus the Rubio (GASP!) water drinking controversy.

By the way, here is a piece in the NYT suggesting that at least part of the Menendez investigation is nothing more than a political smear...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/17/ny...anted=all&_r=0

"the work going on at this suburban Washington office suite, paid for by donations from prominent Republicans nationwide, is proof that the news media frenzy focusing on his actions to help a Florida eye doctor is at least in part a political smear. "

Does the NYT suggest anywhere that 100% of the media frenzy focusing on Rubio's taking a sip of water, is political smear?

I'm sure the NYT is correct that there is politics involved in the Menendez investigation. But why didn't the NYT similarly dismiss the absurd notion that Rubio's taking a sip of water, means anything whatsoever?