In Another Vein

This sounds soo much like Hacket losing Party support. Only with the twist that the WA party just wants the Seat and doesn't care what's the message just so long as the man is electable.

er'uhhmm... Oh. Wait a minute...

[Link] Cantwell, like every other Democratic senator, really only heard from anti-Alito constituents in great numbers for two or three days before the final vote. That level of frenzy should have started on Halloween, the (appropriate) day Alito was nominated, and never let up for an hour until Alito withdrew his nomination. Nothing of the kind happened, and that's our failure. Not Cantwell's. Ours. Though Cantwell has pissed on her base, again, as with more than a dozen other moderate Democratic senators, the candidates that might challenge her — Mark Wilson's quixotic antiwar primary campaign, and Aaron Dixon's rumored Green Party bid — are so hopelessly disadvantaged in organization, money, and support as to be politically meaningless.

That's just some bloody damned pointless electioneering if you really want the best compromise in a candidate. At least Sherrod Brown is a progressive and pretty far left for the current Party. I wonder if he an' Arlen could inject a little spine into Lieberman...

In that spirit, here's today's daily from Media Matters.

Take Action

Yesterday, Media Matters for America released the study "If It's Sunday, It's Conservative," which reveals how conservative voices significantly outweigh progressive voices on three prominent Sunday talk shows. You might have suspected that you were seeing more imbalanced coverage on these programs; now, there is definitive proof. For example, study found that in 2005, Republicans and conservatives held a dramatic advantage in guest bookings for these shows, outnumbering Democrats and progressives by a margin of 58 percent to 42 percent.

This study -- the first of its kind -- shows how conservatives dominate ABC's This Week, CBS' Face the Nation, and NBC's Meet the Press. In every year examined by the study -- 1997 through 2005 -- more panels tilted right (a greater combined number of Republicans and conservatives than Democrats and progressives) than tilted left. In some years, there were two, three, or even four times as many right-tilting panels as left-tilting panels.

This tilt is unacceptable, especially because the networks present these programs as objective and nonpartisan. We need you to help highlight this imbalance!

You can read the executive summary of the report here. Then click here to tell your friends about it.

If the producers of these programs feel that their credibility (and ratings) is threatened by public knowledge of this lack of balance, future programs may be more balanced. Help keep them accountable by spreading the word about their conservative tilt!

Please forward this email to your friends.

© 2005 Media Matters for America
1625 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Suite 300, Washington, D.C. 20036

I kinda like raw news with no tilt. The Networks are just following the money and that's fine except for the polls saying they're the most trusted people in the news. But it's mostly for production quality.

Yeah.. I don't know or even think there's some agenda other than rating$ and their own industry's, uhmm, artistic respect.

It's not like they're bloggers.

{scratchin'head}

But maybe they are, and news is just evolving away from Central Broadcastin' types. Heheh ... One knows certain faux news programs are just as stilted as your average wingnut or moonbat blog.

And there are some good ones. But they're blogs and even Kos has far less budget than Brit or Bill. As least I could finish listening to Brit's bit. Bill is one messed up dude. And waaayyy out of his league for credibility. He's about even w/ Rush, but only a few steps above his close ideological cousins at godhatesfags.

Anyhow, I'm gonna send more emails to congressors to work on that Camp Finance re-engineering for a serious overhaul.

Cavs in double overtime!!!