This is an archive of the old Stones Cry Out site. For the current site, click here.

« The Problem of the Hannity Right | Main | Philippians Overview »

June 15, 2005

Objective Reporting of the Kansas ID v. Evolution Debate

Let’s play a little game, shall we?

Identify the bias introduced by the “objective” AP reporter in this story: “But one of the three board members, Connie Morris, lectured the board's four moderates for not attending the public hearings in May…Conservatives have a 6-4 majority...”

Posted by Rick at June 15, 2005 06:54 PM

Trackback Pings


Rick, the evo crowd is starting to act like the Demos did right before the election - like rats in a corner.

We took a look at "naturalism" in a 27 week Sunday School (gasp) class last year. We invited naturalist, creationists (young-Earth and old-Earth alike) and scientists to come speak and present their material/view.

I'll have to give it to the naturalists - they certainly have a lot of faith.

Posted by: Editor at June 15, 2005 07:50 PM

but of course this won't change your minds will it? You'll just continue to insult the other side and probably won't actually read anything on here will you?

Posted by: Someguy at June 16, 2005 04:56 PM

I hope by "your minds" you refer to the post by Editor and not the bloggers running this site. Recall that the original post at the top of this thread was about media bias. It was Editor that became insulting.

That being said, I think media bias is significantly slanted to the right. Talk radio almost exclusively favors conservative views, as does Fox News, which is news in name only. From Fox’s repeated announcements that U.S. troops found WMD; to the crack by Neil Cavuto that those who question the decision to invade Iraq "make me sick"; to Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly incessantly savaging liberals; to a Fox anchor flipping out on a Vanity Fair editor who suggested it was disrespectful in a time of war for Bush to hold 10 inaugural parties for a cost of $40 million; to interviewing anti-abortion protestors who numbered in the hundreds when hundreds of thousands marched in support of choice the same day in D.C.; to Ann Coulter calling liberals "worse than terrorists"; to the failure of the press in general to question the weak WMD claim during the runup to the Iraq war; to the revelation that the Bush administration has paid many journalists to print or promote administration propaganda; to Chuck Colson being allowed to criticize Deep Throat on multiple networks often without an acknowledgement that Colson served jail time for illegal activities in the Nixon administration. I could go on and on.

Several weeks ago Mark corrected my assertion that “it is the press’s job to criticize those in power”. He correctly stated “the main job of the media is to try to report on facts”. I agree, although I think a certain degree of interpretation with regard to expected impact is often necessary. In that respect, I should have said it is the press’s job to ask questions about policies and the impact that certain events have on policy. Since Republicans are controling national policy now, much of the spotlight is turned on them. Same thing happened to the Dems when they were in power (e.g. Ken Starr’s meandering investigation got near saturation coverage). A lot of conservatives seem to forget that and see "liberal media bias" everywhere. But if anyting, the press is far more respectful now to conservatives than it ever was to liberals. At least in my opinion.

Posted by: dem at June 17, 2005 02:25 AM