Quote:
|
In fact I'm willing to bet that if I had said FOX news and shown 1 example of their bias, there would be damn near 2 pages of replies condemning FOX news, and nairly a post saying anything about where FOX news was fair in the report.
|
Nah, not worth it to spend so much time stating the obvious. [img]tongue.gif[/img]
I think you are right, John D, that there IS over bias in the press. Claims of Bush going AWOL, claims of Kerry being hooked into a Heinz megalopoly that supports terror, all of these things are obvious exaggerations that the press is guilty of making. However, I also think that the particular article treated both men with an even hand. I think the particular article is actually a contrast to articles which attempt to cast the candidate in a bad light.
However, you are right that this article did refer to the Skull & Bones in a less drastic way than others. Now, again, I think that may be another example of how the article contrasts to others. I will concede your point that Skull & Bones will generally receive different media treatment based on the fact that liberal rags will not want to bash Kerry while bashing Bush.
Our "answer" her would require a bit of research. How the Skull & Bones has been represented by the particular newspaper and journalist you quoted is our "missing link." If that journalist/newspaper has always treated the Skull & Bones as a "best and brightest" organization, then they are a contrast to other newspapers. However, if they flip-flopped on it, then your point that they did a 180 will be proven.