I don't watch MSNBC simply because I've never gotten around to it; unlike CNN, which I deliberately avoid.
I've heard MSNBC was biased for years and just assumed it was partisan, Trump-style "fake news" shouting by conservatives. But I'd like to ask of conservatives: what makes MSNBC biased?
I'm sincerely asking this; it's not a set up to argue. If any of you can provide legit examples of MSNBC bias, I'm all ears. And just to show you I'm serious, below is an article from Politico making the case that MSNBC is no less biased than Fox News:
https://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/12/is-msnbc-worse-than-fox-news-179175
So any feedback from conservatives is appreciated.
@vivify saidCNN and MSNBC just offer reality, something Fox News, OANN and Newsmax can't.
I don't watch MSNBC simply because I've never gotten around to it; unlike CNN, which I deliberately avoid.
I've heard MSNBC was biased for years and just assumed it was partisan, Trump-style "fake news" shouting by conservatives. But I'd like to ask of conservatives: what makes MSNBC biased?
I'm sincerely asking this; it's not a set up to argue. If any of you can p ...[text shortened]... ia/2013/12/is-msnbc-worse-than-fox-news-179175
So any feedback from conservatives is appreciated.
07 Jan 22
1 edit
@suzianne saidDid you read the Politico article? they make an interesting case on why MSNBC is just as biased as Fox News. The article was written by Dylan Byers, who worked as a senior reporter for CNN, NBC and Politico.
CNN and MSNBC just offer reality, something Fox News, OANN and Newsmax can't.
To be clear, the article only focuses on the broadcasts and doesn't discuss the quality of MSNBC's written journalism.
@suzianne saidThat's laughable 😄
CNN and MSNBC just offer reality, something Fox News, OANN and Newsmax can't.
What reality do they offer?
The "we are too scared to say anything about non whites but we will gladly say white man bad"?
When CNN has the balls to say black people commit 50 percent of all violent crimes (FBI report) then I will say they are offering reality.
They are scared to say the truth.
That is just one example of many.
Remember when Asians were getting attacked?
CNN wouldn't say who was doing it.
It took Dave Chapelle a comedian with balls to say who was attacking Asians in hate crimes.
Remember them not saying the description of a suspect? That only happened when the suspect was black.
If the suspect was white they would have some big racism story about the case 🙄
What reality are you talking about suzi?
Cuomo and Don Lemon charged with sexual assault. 2 CNN producers charged with sexual assault on kids.
They are dead last in the ratings because people are tired of the self loathing white people who run that network and the anti white self loathing virtue signaling clowns like you who watch it are getting old.
07 Jan 22
@contenchess saidIt is impossible to make sense in our posts, when the underlying foundation is that everyone is biased in some way, and it would have to be a saint to give the news without leaning a bit a certain way. Suzy doesn't like Trump personally. I don't like AOC personally. So, would it be proper for news organizations to put people of a certain bent, or Don Lemon, or Dan Bongino in an anchor's chair delivering the news?. Absolutely not. So, who in the world would qualify as a totally unbiased reporter?
That's laughable 😄
What reality do they offer?
The "we are to scared to say anything about non whites but we will gladly say white man bad"?
When CNN has the balls to say black people commit 50 percent of all homicides/violent crimes (FBI report) then I will say they are offering reality.
They are scared to say the truth.
That is just one example of many.
...[text shortened]... e they would have some big racism story about the case 🙄
What reality are you talking about suzi?
Then there is the money factor. If a catholic nun read the news of an event exactly as it happened, with zero inflection in her voice, it would be very dry and boring,,,,,,,,,so no advertisers from which the news corps would finance their operations. People are looking for a bit of 'titilation' on their respective side, something to chew on, to get fired up about. I get that from Breitbart (not Fox) and libs may get their fix from Rachel Maddow. It sells.
@AverageJoe1
Oh I agree and I read the news from all of the big networks, even the ones I hate.
I just hate race traitors. I hate them more than anyone or anything else in this world.
@vivify saidThis is a good place to start.
I don't watch MSNBC simply because I've never gotten around to it; unlike CNN, which I deliberately avoid.
I've heard MSNBC was biased for years and just assumed it was partisan, Trump-style "fake news" shouting by conservatives. But I'd like to ask of conservatives: what makes MSNBC biased?
I'm sincerely asking this; it's not a set up to argue. If any of you can p ...[text shortened]... ia/2013/12/is-msnbc-worse-than-fox-news-179175
So any feedback from conservatives is appreciated.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/msnbc/
The default position of most MSNBC hosts (e.g., Maddow, Hayes, O'Donnell, Reid) is that every Republican politician and position is morally bankrupt and informed by sinister motives. They obliterated Manchin and Sinema for example, with wild claims about their evil nature and corruption and made Sinema's elevator comment into a mini-series.
I don't watch a ton of cable news, but IME, MSNBC is about as biased as Fox. And both have gotten worse. MSNBC used to be more balanced with Joe Scarborough and Chris Matthews (who was a liberal, but not a cloying fawning cringing liberal) and Fox used to have people like Chris Wallace.
Both sides seem to have decided that fawning to the basest of the base is the only way to get ratings.
07 Jan 22
@sh76 saidIn a different thread, you asked "is Fox News more biased than MSNBC?"
This is a good place to start.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/msnbc/
The default position of most MSNBC hosts (e.g., Maddow, Hayes, O'Donnell, Reid) is that every Republican politician and position is morally bankrupt and informed by sinister motives. They obliterated Manchin and Sinema for example, with wild claims about their evil nature and corruption and made Sinema's ...[text shortened]... th sides seem to have decided that fawning to the basest of the base is the only way to get ratings.
What prompted you to ask that? Was it just from reports of bias that you've read/heard, or also from watching the show?
07 Jan 22
@vivify saidAn objective analysis. Repubs in 2016 propel Trump to victory. Immediately, every powerful interest in this country launched a scorched-earth campaign against him. Went to war with him. Illegally leaking his Tax returns, illegal targeting, planting evidence, fabricated evidence, racial hoaxes, rape hoaxes, tried everything. Then COVID hit, they blasted out millions of ballots that no one has ever seen. Then Zuckerberg drops 1/2 Billion to pay for private election activists to layer on top of the state election officials.
I don't watch MSNBC simply because I've never gotten around to it; unlike CNN, which I deliberately avoid.
I've heard MSNBC was biased for years and just assumed it was partisan, Trump-style "fake news" shouting by conservatives. But I'd like to ask of conservatives: what makes MSNBC biased?
I'm sincerely asking this; it's not a set up to argue. If any of you can p ...[text shortened]... ia/2013/12/is-msnbc-worse-than-fox-news-179175
So any feedback from conservatives is appreciated.
Reuters: FBI has found no evidence that Jan 6 was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election. No evidence that Trump was involved in anything. No seditious activity.
Understand this, and then realize all the typing you turkeys have been doing, all for naught. Trump is innocent of Jan 6.
I put this in this thread, because you ask about biased reporting. FOX defends the truth, written above, they are facts. Yet, MSNBC will still carry on with bias against an innocent man.
As Walter Cronkite would say, 'and that's the way it is.'
08 Jan 22
1 edit
@averagejoe1 said"Reuters: FBI has found no evidence that Jan 6 was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election. No evidence that Trump was involved in anything. No seditious activity. "
An objective analysis. Repubs in 2016 propel Trump to victory. Immediately, every powerful interest in this country launched a scorched-earth campaign against him. Went to war with him. Illegally leaking his Tax returns, illegal targeting, planting evidence, fabricated evidence, racial hoaxes, rape hoaxes, tried everything. Then COVID hit, they blasted out millions of ...[text shortened]... on with bias against an innocent man.
As Walter Cronkite would say, 'and that's the way it is.'
Given the interviews with Peter Navarro, it seems that Reuters is lying, doesn't it?
And given that he was recorded inciting the crowd to riot on the Capitol, it seems that Trump is not so "innocent", doesn't it?
You are a shill for Trump, with no morals and no shame.
08 Jan 22
@vivify saidIf MSNBC "leans left", then why on earth are you asking conservatives if they see bias?
Did you read the Politico article? they make an interesting case on why MSNBC is just as biased as Fox News. The article was written by Dylan Byers, who worked as a senior reporter for CNN, NBC and Politico.
To be clear, the article only focuses on the broadcasts and doesn't discuss the quality of MSNBC's written journalism.
Of course they do. Like Trump, if anyone says anything against him, suddenly they are "horrible". Why do you think conservatives now hate the FBI and love Russia?
08 Jan 22
@vivify
Years ago I heard some French minister say:
'The corporate elites that run the US government and all major news networks make great effort to keep Americans as ignorant, stupid and scared as possible.'
Boy was he spot on. The amount of half-truths, lies, clever propaganda and irrational nonsense being fed to the public day after day is astounding. And those smart people who read stuff like the NYT who think they're too smart for propaganda fall right into it face first.
08 Jan 22
4 edits
@suzianne saidI'm not asking "if" they see bias, I'm asking what bias they actually see. Notice so far, not a single conservative has given an actual example of MSNBC bias. It was the same with the Rachael Maddow thread:
If MSNBC "leans left", then why on earth are you asking conservatives if they see bias?
Of course they do. Like Trump, if anyone says anything against him, suddenly they are "horrible". Why do you think conservatives now hate the FBI and love Russia?
Thread 191601
I dared the conservatives to post even one instance of alleged "lies" they claim Maddow told; just one before the 4th page of that thread. Surprise, surprise, they couldn't name a single one of these "lies" they claimed were so numerous. That thread currently stands at four pages of nothing.
Now it's Deja vu. Not a single specific instance of bias named.
Meanwhile, I can spend hours naming every bias thing Fox News does; from Hannity ripping on Obama for ordering "fancy mustard" while supporting Trump, who owns a golden throne inside of a golden condo, to Fox News being found even by the UK to be biased.
So relax. While I was legitimately interested to hear their views, it seems, as expected, conservatives will not be able to actually name the bias they claim liberals have; they just mindlessly their critics are biased, knowing they aren't able to actually able to support that claim.
So relax. This just builds up a history of threads showing conservatives are full of dung.
08 Jan 22
@bunnyknight saidhttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4-XVjgnbyyo
@vivify
Years ago I heard some French minister say:
'The corporate elites that run the US government and all major news networks make great effort to keep Americans as ignorant, stupid and scared as possible.'
Boy was he spot on. The amount of half-truths, lies, clever propaganda and irrational nonsense being fed to the public day after day is astounding. And t ...[text shortened]... ho read stuff like the NYT who think they're too smart for propaganda fall right into it face first.