Difference between revisions of "Talk:MSM"

Revision as of 16:34, August 2, 2007

What does the discussion of Wikiepdia here have to do with anything? I'm confused. PortlyMort 16:12, 31 July 2007 (EDT)

I removed that bit. Seems to be a mark of an unhealthy obession with Wikipedia. If it's supposed to illustrate some sort of bias (which isn't readily apparent), explain it and put it on the Bias in Wikipedia page. PortlyMort 22:57, 31 July 2007 (EDT)

Do liberals really use the initials MSM to allege conservative bias in the media?

I don't see that. What I do see is most liberals denying that the MSM have any bias at all. If anyone is accusing the MSM of having a conservative bias, it is usually those who are even further to the left--like the Daily Kos.--TerryH^Talk 21:18, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

Yes, they do. All sides of the political spectrum tend to feel that their views are not properly represented in the 'mainstream media', and given the fact that Fox News' viewing figures are now greater than CNN's, there's no denying - whatever one's views - that there are widely-aired viewpoints that do not concur with a liberal agenda. Most liberals would definitely feel that the 'MSM' is quite far to the right. BrianRobertson 21:24, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

Well, I'll tell you what: why don't you go dig up a survey of people who describe themselves as liberal. Seems to me as though you're counting the voices of liberal politicians, editors, anchors, et cetera.--TerryH^Talk 21:29, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

Alternet, a liberal news site, has some good refs that you can check: [1], [2], [3]

Oh, and one more thing: Don't tell me that Fox News is part of the MSM. It's not, they never pretend to be, and indeed they are proud to say that they are not.--TerryH^Talk 21:32, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

According to Nielsen:

• Fox News has 9 of the 10 most viewed shows on Cable TV News in Dec 2006
• Fox News mean peaktime viewing figures are triple that of MSNBC, and double that of CNN
• "In 2006, more than half the people watching cable news were watching Fox News (as they have since 2001)."[4]

That sounds like the very definition of mainstream to me, no? BrianRobertson 22:12, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

I could've swore that MSM-status was decided by how mainstream something was, not whether or not it claimed to be mainstream... Kazumaru 21:35, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

Why don't you bring me a citation to that effect? What you did in fact swear (and in what forum?), or could or could not have sworn, is of no moment here.

Never have I seen a definition of "mainstream media" based on numbers of patrons only. Take care: by your definition, Fox would be comfortably mainstream while CNN stood in danger of losing that status--along with The New York Times, which is losing circulation with every passing year, if not every passing month.

But you know, or should know, that that's not how it works. Why do you think that Senator Diane Feinstein wants to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine? It's because she wants to rid the earth of the alternative media and leave only the mainstream media as I have defined and listed it in this article.--TerryH^Talk 23:29, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

How's this? Not entirely sure what's up with the sentence after you asking for a citation, but in any case...

I'm shaking in fear of the you thinking the New York Times isn't mainstream. Absolutely terrified.

And finally: I wasn't aware that the US' policies affected the entire Earth... Kazumaru 00:10, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

The dictionary definition you gave, will serve at best for an etymology of the phrase mainstream media and not for a corrective to the common use of the term. Names stick, and often for reasons that no lexicographer would predict or can even understand after the fact.

Do you deny that The New York Times is losing circulation? See what I mean by defining mainstream media according to present circulation?

And as to US policies affecting the entire Earth--well, don't they? Does not the United States have the most powerful military of any nation-state now extant? As to "rid the earth": that kind of expression goes back to Roman times. For example:

Then they raised their voices and shouted, "Rid the earth of him! He's not fit to live!" Acts 22:22 (NIV)

Conservatives feel that everyone in the television MSM except Fox News has a liberal bias. That means ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN. So the liberals think one station (Fox News) is conservative. That's leaves ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN with a liberal bias. It doesn't make sense for liberals to think that the 'MSM' is quite far to the right. --Crocoite 21:37, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

That's wrong too - the more liberal or left-leaning, the more they feel that ALL channels and outlets are MSM. BrianRobertson 22:16, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

It's also used in any case where ABC, CBS, NBC or CNN understate something that Liberals feel to be a big issue, or taking the Administration's side just to be safe. Kazumaru 21:39, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

Should probably clarify- It's not shouted from the rooftops as much by Libs as by Cons. Kazumaru 21:42, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

Actually this idea of liberals using the MSM to mean conservative bias wouldn't be that surprising. They like to use our words and turn them into their liberal meaning. Like "gay" and "rainbow". --Crocoite 21:51, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

Yes, how dare they make rainbow mean "... optical and meteorological phenomena that cause a spectrum of light to appear in the sky when the Sun shines onto droplets of moisture in the Earth's atmosphere." Before, it was just "PRETTY THING FROM GOD!" And so it should always be. And that's, that's the way I feel about it! Kazumaru 21:59, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

Alternative Press

I think it is confusing to use the term 'alternative press' in this context, as generally, the left-wing/freesheet/liberal press also call themselves the 'alternative press'. For ref, see Alternet as I've linked to above. BrianRobertson 12:34, 2 August 2007 (EDT)