Why do I refuse to argue the point? You really wanna know? Alright, here's the sanitized version, as my feelings are actually quite a bit more profane.

It is a pointless argument, which no one can ever win. I've done a half-dozen times with a half-dozen different people, and every single time it was merely a rehash of the same profoundly tired arguments. Both sides can come up with reams of evidence for why they're right, but consistently fails completely to convince the other side.

In the end, the only results I've ever seen are similar to those of the Korean War: Neither side has really gained anything, and both are rather worse off. Not only that, but both sides are still utterly convinced of their own rightness. And in my experience, when that situation arises, it usually means everybody's wrong and the answer lies somewhere in the middle.

And even if one or the other had a stronger case, it doesn't matter. I'm sick of whiny liberals and conservatives both complaining about how the "mainstream media" (whatever in the hell that means) misrepresents, underrepresents, or slights their viewpoint in some other way.

It shouldn't even be an issue. If you don't like one corporation's particular bias, pay attention to one whose bias you like better. Or better yet, listen to as many different ones as you can, and form your own bloody opinions. Don't just take the pre-digested ones spouted by talking heads.

Why do we argue about this anyway? It's not a real issue at all. Health care, education, foreign policy, those are issues. Not who says what and why. Corporations (and their biases) do NOT MATTER. PEOPLE matter. So get off it and put your energy towards something that'll actually accomplish something.

So, what's to do? Eliminate corporate control over the media? Careful Joey, you're starting to sound like a socialist. (Yes, that's a joke.) But yeah, I'd agree with that.

Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is not that the lack of objectivity in the media doesn't matter; it's that bickering over how exactly it lacks said objectivity is stupid. I suppose that last paragraph isn't really well-put together. I did just kind of tack it on the end without really going over it. Everybody hear that? The final paragraph is BAD. Try to avoid paying attention to it.

Actually, the issue is a huge one.

What medium has the power to direct the flow of public opinion or alter the outcome of an election?

The media.

Conservative/liberal bias is rampant among the mainstream press.

Mainstream press, Tricky, is this:

NBC, CBS, ABC, New York Times, Washington Post

That's the mainstream press.

A journalist's job is to report all sides of a story accurately and be objective ...

...unfortunately, 98 percent of all media neglects this simple doctrine.

Thank God for the independent press, for which I am a member (I'm a reporter for The Ellis County Press, an independent paper based south of Dallas).

There is a problem when corporations start running the media - that's a huge problem.

You cannot effectively do your job with some kiss-*** newspaper company and/or editor, publisher telling you not to write certain things.

If the mainstream press were to tell us what our government really and honestly did, we'd have riots and mass killings of politicians everywhere.

The same guys lining the pockets of the politicos are the same guys running our media institutions.


Journalists should be trusted among citizens; instead, they're just like a crooked politician.



This might not be a big issue with anyone else, but it sure the heck is with me.

I'm a member of the media and I hate the fact it's just so slanted.

We're considered a "conservative" paper because of our editorial pages, not because of the news we publish - our paper publishes "what really goes on" in our local governments.

And I'll admit it - I do have a bias against big government politicians who want to screw around taxpayers.

But I make sure my arguments are backed up with facts.

That's a problem among the mainstream press.