Comment Re:Duh. (Score 1) 1601
The problem with that is that the new is supposed to be a check in this system of checks and balances. That is a major reason for the freedom of the press. They are supposed to be able to investigate and criticize the government. If you bring in "news for ratings" you break the balance. The news is supposed to report...well, the news.
Biases will happen, but gross, conscious biases prevent people from getting the facts.
The fact that many news organizations wrote positive articles about Obama can be directly abtributed to his charisma and positive message.
What I found appalling is the lack of research and fact finding the news has been doing on either side. They should have been digging deep and offering information without an agenda.
Fox on the other hand was inventing stories with and obvious bias. They had nothing to back up many of the stories, but headlined them anyway. This is just irresponsible, and if someone were doing it in the liberal direction, it would be just as bad.
Even if all news organizations were unbiased, you have to realize that the news will not always be in the direction you like. Putting the number of article for one candidate against the number of the other one without understanding the other factors is simply bad science and is only hurting us as a nation. Remember that the decrease in pirates is the reason for global warming... http://www.venganza.org/about/open-letter/