« Could Colin Powell have won the presidency? | Main | Bush praises Bush via Ford »

December 31, 2006

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451d25c69e200d83508620069e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference New York Times sneers at "wingnuts":

Comments

"...it's also true that elite news reporters skew conservative on economic issues."

This is a fantasy. On what possible basis would you make such a statement? Elite news reporters tend to be liberal Democrats.

For shame, that some reporter would refer by inference that there exist some right-wing nuts in the political universe. I think that Brendan, Mr. Reasonable Himself, should glance at Media Matters.org on occassion, for multifarious examples of such.

Yes...Media Matters...they never skew the facts based on political ideology or anything...

And the Elitist term is the most bloated of all political words.
The word is now only used by bloviating political pundits (Bill O'Rielly), and people with huge book deals (Bernard Goldberg).

That said, there's no denying that the New York Times has a problem with its coverage of conservatives, which has been limited in scope and often sneering or uncomprehending in tone. The problem is bad enough that the paper created a conservative beat in January 2004.

Factless, this claim means nothing.

That the Times created a conservative beat doesn't prove anything except that the Times created a conservative beat, it certainly doesn't prove things at the Times we're "bad" as regards conservatives.

It was the Times, after all, that created the Love Canal lie about Al Gore.

Karen, I honestly don't believe Media Matters skews the truth. Typically, the lies and distortions highlighted by media matters stand alone in juxtaposition to related known (or as Rumsfeld would say, knowable) facts.

It's one thing to start with a fact, and argue relative to political ideology what relevance that fact has to this or that. It's quite another, to claim a different set of facts. If you find a good example of Media Matters skewing facts, then let me know. I'll be as interested as you, in setting the record straight.

This is sadly typical of the America-hating pinko MSM, who are the reason we are losing the war in Iraq. Kudos to you, Mr. Nyhan, for taking it on head-on. We need more conservatives like you in the media to help set the bias straight.

May God bless these United States in the New Year.

Apparently DougJ didn't read the post very closely. And it's absurd to say we're losing in Iraq because of the media.

Dougj is an example of why the use of the word "wingnut" is acceptable. What is not acceptable is to pretend that extremists aren't.

...Perhaps I was being too harsh with Media Matters...

I am always skeptical of organizations that favor one part of the political spectrum over the other, a trait which I believe that Media Matters has.
But i am aware that my previous post falls victim to a hasty fallacy and apologize.

Media Matters Link

Media Matters describes itself as "a web-based, not-for-profit, progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.(my emphasis)

That is a specific agenda, one that would certainly appear to be liberally-biased I'm not condemning them for this, I'm just saying that you can't deny that this is what they do.

Hey, my girlfriend is mentioned in that Patricia Heaton article! I couldn't be prouder.

The comments to this entry are closed.