The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

I love Politics.

I get bent at each of the 3 major cable news networks, though be it for different reasons.  FOX - Conservative mouthpiece with very little real news.  CNN - Cowards that sensationalize the left/right battle, rather than focusing on the merit of the issues.  Now, MSNBC.  I know that they are criticized for being the FOX for Liberals, but they hadn't traditionally been this bad, until now.

I like Hardball with Chris Matthews.  I don't always agree with the guy, but I enjoy his look at the "game" of politics and how what politicians say (right or wrong) will play and affect campaigns.  However, with the Republican race being back and forth, with a new leader every day, MSNBC's blatant attacking of the frontrunner is becoming ridiculously transparent.  I don't mind having a channel with a more liberal mindset deliver the news.  ...that's fine.  But be consistent and report the news.  Don't make it.  This week, they're all over Santorum.  ...and they should be; the dude says the craziest shit.  But you don't hear a lick about Gingrich.  Two weeks ago, he was all the rage.  They just jump back and forth spending an entire show bashing the guy who won the most recent state.

I demand better.  Chris Matthews' opinion is valuable.  He's smart and has been around.  I really respect a lot of the guests, specifically guys like Michael Smerconish and Chuck Todd.  ...but this is a joke.  It actually legitimizes networks like FOX when you use their same tactics.

I just don't watch the news until it appears on The Daily Show and/or The Colbert Report. I used to watch the news a lot in college but it was just so bad with how slanted everything is. No one can just report the news anymore, there's always some sort of slant with it. It just seems like the best place to get the news is on a satirical comedy show.

I have issue with these channels being called news anyway. It may be different during the daytime, but I don't watch them then. They provide commentaries and not news. The key is differentiating between the two and most people don't.

And I'm OK with commentary.  It's not even that.

It's when the commentary isn't honest, but it's just spin.  If you want to shit-talk Santorum because he's a zealot unfit for office -- go ahead, you'd be right.  However, don't only do it the week he wins and then not the week he doesn't.  Don't let your editorializing be dictated solely by who's winning, in other words.

I want to shit-talk Santorum. Is there a place for that?

I don't really watch any of the new stations. I'm with Cathal and generally catch stuff on the Daily Show, Colbert, and a hand full of blogs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no9fpKVXxCc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no9fpKVXxCc)

You want to know why they aren't talking about Gingrich or Bachmann today?  Because they are not relevant.

Nobody cares what the new batsh*t insane thing Cain has to say is.  That's why you see the frontrunner as the person being talked about.  It's not "spin"; it's gearing your show towards current events.

Would anyone watching Fox really want to see an hour-long discussion on Arlen Specter or Charlie Crist?  Of course not.  They are meaningless now.

^ Fair question, but perhaps I'm misstating my position.

On Hardball, each day they comment on both Romney and Santorum.

If Santorum is in the lead, the story is: "Santorum is a zealot lunatic.  Say what you want about Romney, but at least he's on this planet."

If Romney is in the lead, the story is: "Romney is an out of touch fraud with no convictions.  Say what you want about Santorum, but at least he's genuine and voters are responding to him."

If MSNBC is more favored towards the Democrats, then this us exactly what they need to say.  By throwing mud on the leading GOP candidate, it ensures a dogfight in the GOP primary and the winner may not be able to take on Obama. 

I don't care if you editorialize with liberal views.  I'm OK with that.  But don't become part of the politics.  It's like they're acting on behalf of the campaign.

Two points:

Given that MSNBC is traditionally the third-place network*, it's somewhat stuck making the news in an attempt to reel in as many viewers as it possibly can. It realizes that Fox has a really successful formula, and that CNN's limp-wristed tactics just don't work. So it tries to ape Fox.

In addition, all of the later-in-the-day commentators, be they O'Reilly or Maddow or Matthews or whoever are just hired guns. They'll go after whoever, whenever, as long as the dollar amount is right. I wouldn't put too much faith in anyone of them. Their whole show is geared towards entertainment... not reporting. So, I don't know that it's fair to expect journalistic ethics from people who are, in essence, trained seals with shiny degrees and loud voices.

*This is an old chart, but, I think it shows the differences quite nicely: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/2010.01.31-Average-P2+-590x455.png

To some extent, I agree with what you're saying; the one thing that you can say about all the media outlets is that they are biased towards sensationalism.  So every story about virtually every race will be about tearing down the frontrunner and building up the underdog, because that manufactures drama and intrigue.

Yeah.  I don't watch news for manufactured drama.

Fair enough, but then you've basically eliminated the entirety of American news (save maybe NPR).

From every outlet, every issue is left-vs.-right.  What passes for "objective journalism" these days is letting both sides say whatever the hell they want and then pretending that all points are equally valid.

I listen to Alan Colmes from time to time...Listened to him tonight, and it sounded like a Dr. Drew show because he had the owner of the Bunny Ranch and a couple employees on...anyway, I like Colmes. I respect his opinion even though it 99% of the time differs from mine, but I have on more than one occasion found myself questioning a view I have as a result of listening to him. Why? He puts out his points, and explains them. He does not just regurgitate moveon.org or the Huffington Post or anything else for his opinions. That is all I have seen on MSNBC.

As for Dave's post, that proves what I was saying. The only people who just talk about one candidate and only one candidate are doing nothing other than reading headlines and maybe the first paragraph of a NYT article, or something off moveon or Huff. I listened to Colmes a couple weeks ago, and he was talking about all the candidates, and their views. I'm sure he would have been doing the same thing tonight if he didnt have his guests. lol