Is there too much censorship in the media?

[Highland 0]

I personally think there is, and while we all know there are definately political slants in media coverage and while I believe this in itself is a form of censorship, I am refering more towards the omitting of facts, the "spinning", concentrated ownership and the overabundance of fluff stories that saturate our airwaves and other informational medium.

[Guest Phenom]

I voted YesNo.

[Highland 0]

It's my first poll. I fucked up, so I'm asking for it to be deleted or fixed.

[Guest MikeSC]

Yeah, there is --- but sadly, there has ALWAYS been too much censorship in the media. I do not feel that it is unusually bad now.

-=Mike

...Just remember, as little as 10 yrs ago, finding reports of the news you don't know about was quite difficult...

[Highland 0]

True, the internet has definately been a good thing in that regard, but the vast majority of people still get there news from the traditions forms for television, print and radio.

[Guest MikeSC]

True, the internet has definately been a good thing in that regard, but the vast majority of people still get there news from the traditions forms for television, print and radio.

Oh, I know. My point was just that it was that there had always been a lot of censorship. It's just that the knowledge of it is more readily available now.

-=Mike

[Guest Cerebus]

Don't blame Highland, he's just following the example of those bastions of reliability the Exit Polls.

[Highland 0]

Ouch.

[EricMM 0]

Yes of course.

 

Maybe if us Americans would see the horrors of wars, maybe they wouldn't be desensitized to them.

 

Maybe not be willing to continue starting them

[Guest Cerebus]

Ok, think about every acclaimed war movie in the US. Platoon, Apocalypse Now, Full Metal Jacket, Saving Private Ryan, The Big Red One, The Longest Day etc. You're telling me these are all sunny representations of war?

 

I think many give the American people too little credit. While I am of the opinion that we are a much MUCH softer people than our grandparents and great-grandparents were during WW II it is possible to support the war when you know full well what our brave men and women are going through. Why do you think all those pictures of the flag draped coffins (a day C-Bacon most likely spent with a sock and a picture of Chomsky) actually BOOSTED Bush's ratings?

[EricMM 0]

Oh come on.

 

Everyone knows movies about war are just that, movies.

 

Why is it illegal or even demoralizing to show the faces and injuries of Americans who've been hurt in this war? Why is it illegal to show the caskets coming back, or see the injuries of the Iraqis? Because it's unpopular.

 

It's pretty fucked up that we can go to war in this country and not have to deal with the consequences. That the media allows us to go ahead with clean thoughts about one of the most disgusting actions there is (the declaration of war)

[Guest Cerebus]

Why is it illegal or even demoralizing to show the faces and injuries of Americans who've been hurt in this war? Why is it illegal to show the caskets coming back, or see the injuries of the Iraqis? Because it's unpopular.

 

It is, as far as I know, a DoD policy intended to protect the families of the dead from their family member's corpse or coffin seen everywhere. It is unpopular to publish them, but with those of families of the deceased or injured, many of whom were furious about the spread of those pictures (and, speaking as someone who has a family member in Iraq, I don't blame them). And, as mentioned before, after they were released support for Bush and the Iraq war went up so if preventing their publishing is a big propaganda effort its obviously not a very good one.

 

And if you think the media hangs on to good news as far as Iraq goes, you are wrong. Dead wrong. Don't believe me? Do a google news search for "Hatra" and one for "Abu Ghraib."

[Styles 0]

If it was a month ago I'd mention John Kerry loves these types of polls!

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

I could use this topic to advance my new idea of political ideas.. "Freedom v. Control" (to replace "Liberal v. Conservative").. but I won't..

 

still.. there's been a shift towards censorship and legislating and regulating morality is something doomed to failure.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Don't blame Highland, he's just following the example of those bastions of reliability the Exit Polls.

I still haven't found what the problem with the exit polls was.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

They oversampled Democrat areas. That's what was "wrong." Personally, I think exit polls are retarded to begin with.

 

Oh, and I voted "no" because of the term "censorship," which I take as the gvt. not letting media reports go out to the masses -- sorry for pulling an Arlen Specter.

 

And Highland, you're forgiven for ruining the poll -- we all have to learn sometime...

[Highland 0]

They oversampled Democrat areas. That's what was "wrong." Personally, I think exit polls are retarded to begin with.

 

Oh, and I voted "no" because of the term "censorship," which I take as the gvt. not letting media reports go out to the masses -- sorry for pulling an Arlen Specter.

 

And Highland, you're forgiven for ruining the poll -- we all have to learn sometime...

kkk apologizing, who'd have seen the day?

 

Anyway, what did Specter say/do?

 

edit: Ah, he's on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Edited November 22, 2004 by Highland

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

They oversampled Democrat areas. That's what was "wrong." Personally, I think exit polls are retarded to begin with.

Bzzzttt, wrong answer. From Dick Morris:

 

That an exit poll is always right is an axiom of politics. It is easier to assume that a compass is not pointing north than to assume that an exit poll is incorrect. It takes a deliberate act of fraud and bias to get an exit poll wrong. Since the variables of whether or not a person will actually vote are eliminated in exit polling, it is like peeking at the answer before taking the test.

 

Either the polls were wrong or the vote was wrong. With such little transparency in the electoral process due to e-voting, the vote can easily be tampered with.

[Guest MikeSC]

Funny you quote Morris, considering what HE thinks the problem is.

-=Mike

...Amazing that a conspiracy that would require thousands of people to pull off is kept quiet, huh?

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Funny you quote Morris, considering what HE thinks the problem is.

-=Mike

...Amazing that a conspiracy that would require thousands of people to pull off is kept quiet, huh?

I never alleged voter fraud. And maybe Morris is right. If the exit polls were manipulated, then whoever did it should be punished.

 

However, it is quite easy to manipulate Diebold results from what I have read. I don't think it would take the grand orchestration that you suggest. Just a few targeted manipulations in key states.

 

I think it's funny that Repubs are so defensive about reform of e-voting if they are so sure that the process was clean.

[Guest MikeSC]

Funny you quote Morris, considering what HE thinks the problem is.

      -=Mike

...Amazing that a conspiracy that would require thousands of people to pull off is kept quiet, huh?

I never alleged voter fraud. And maybe Morris is right. If the exit polls were manipulated, then whoever did it should be punished.

 

However, it is quite easy to manipulate Diebold results from what I have read. I don't think it would take the grand orchestration that you suggest. Just a few targeted manipulations in key states.

 

I think it's funny that Repubs are so defensive about reform of e-voting if they are so sure that the process was clean.

No --- we're annoyed because, just like with 2000, the left is trying to claim Bush stole the election. The left is, as per usual, acting like petulant children.

 

Again, try and show the class of Nixon.

-=Mike

[Guest Cerebus]

Funny you quote Morris, considering what HE thinks the problem is.

      -=Mike

...Amazing that a conspiracy that would require thousands of people to pull off is kept quiet, huh?

I never alleged voter fraud. And maybe Morris is right. If the exit polls were manipulated, then whoever did it should be punished.

 

However, it is quite easy to manipulate Diebold results from what I have read. I don't think it would take the grand orchestration that you suggest. Just a few targeted manipulations in key states.

 

I think it's funny that Repubs are so defensive about reform of e-voting if they are so sure that the process was clean.

More likely, exit polls were simply unreliable. It can happen and it did happen. Exit polling has been notoriously innacurate and unreliable in 2000 and most analysts (including Bill Shneider, one of the best in the buisness) have questioned whether or not its a wise idea to continue to use them.

 

Also, there were anamolies and problems, BUT Verified Voting which claims to be non partisan (and has a lot of voting "conspiracy theories" in its news section) had this to say:

 

So far, we have not seen convincing evidence of either fraud nor of a major error in the Presidential election.

 

As of this writing (11/14/04), we have seen a lot of supposed evidence of fraud or errors. In some cases, these stories can be refuted by simple fact checking. In others, experts can point to other probable explanations, In others, we haven't seen enough of the debate to know what to think. There are probably others that haven't come out yet.

...

It is unlikely that there will be an election problem large enough to overturn the Presidential election.

 

According to the numbers posted on Nov 3, President Bush won by about 3% (about 3.5 Million votes) in the popular vote, 2% (about 135,000 votes) in Ohio, and by 5% (almost 400,000 votes) in Florida. Some very large discrepancies would need to be found to reverse the election.

 

So given what we know at this time it seems unlikely to happen. If, tomorrow, someone finds 100,000 Kerry votes were miscounted as Bush votes in Ohio, we'll revise this opinion very quickly. But that hasn't happened.

 

Salon, which would like nothing better than see Bush gone down in flames on the 2nd, found no convincing evidence that the election was "stolen." Like you, though, there were a lot more problems than I would have liked to see. Maybe when the GAO finishes its report we'll learn more.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Again, I'm not questioning the outcome of the election or alleging fraud. I would just like to know why the exit polls were wrong. How and why are they unreliable? I have yet to see how this could happen, other than Mike's left-wing conspiracy theory.

 

Schneider is a political guy, not a pollster or a statistician. Maybe scrapping the polls is a good idea though--but they are used to sniff out fraud in emerging democracies. Why can't we use them here? I know it's scary to think that fraud could happen, but it could. And it might not necessarily be perpetrated through some grand conspiracy by either side, but a few schmucks working at precinct levels.

 

And why did the polls start becoming effed up in 2000?

 

I can't see why anyone would oppose a more transparent electoral process.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

the left is trying to claim Bush stole the election.

I'm not.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Either the polls were wrong or the vote was wrong. With such little transparency in the electoral process due to e-voting, the vote can easily be tampered with.

Oh dear God, please don't tell me you're going to be launching conspiracy theories about Bush "stealing" Election 2004.

 

And I'm standing by my exit poll theory. In PA Kerry was given WAY too much credit in the exit polls, and in PA the results from Pittsburgh and Philly always come in first, giving the Democrat candidate a big lead that gets chopped away as the more conservative districts in the middle of the state come in.

 

kkk apologizing, who'd have seen the day?

 

I'm man enough to admit my mistakes, as few and far between as they may be.

 

Anyway, what did Specter say/do?

 

I was making a reference to the Clinton impeachment days. Back then Crazy Arlen, when forced to vote to boot Bill out of office, chose to invoke some hippie Scottish law thing that wasn't a Yay or Nay vote.

 

Why the hell did I vote for him again this year?...

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Either the polls were wrong or the vote was wrong.  With such little transparency in the electoral process due to e-voting, the vote can easily be tampered with.

Oh dear God, please don't tell me you're going to be launching conspiracy theories about Bush "stealing" Election 2004.

 

And I'm standing by my exit poll theory. In PA Kerry was given WAY too much credit in the exit polls, and in PA the results from Pittsburgh and Philly always come in first, giving the Democrat candidate a big lead that gets chopped away as the more conservative districts in the middle of the state come in.

 

kkk apologizing, who'd have seen the day?

 

I'm man enough to admit my mistakes, as few and far between as they may be.

 

Anyway, what did Specter say/do?

 

I was making a reference to the Clinton impeachment days. Back then Crazy Arlen, when forced to vote to boot Bill out of office, chose to invoke some hippie Scottish law thing that wasn't a Yay or Nay vote.

 

Why the hell did I vote for him again this year?...

Again, I'm not questioning the outcome of the election or alleging fraud.

 

Stand by the theory all you want, but the polls are weighted for differences in polling between Democrats and Republicans. Dick Morris said this was "elementary."

 

The results coming in earlier in urban areas has nothing to do with the exit polls.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Frankly, I don't care because the only "exit polling" that matters is the one done in the voting booth...

[Guest MikeSC]

Frankly, I don't care because the only "exit polling" that matters is the one done in the voting booth...

Not to the psychotic left.

-=Mike

..Of course, Kerry was recently quoted as saying "They're still counting the votes in Ohio", showing that concessions aren't quite what they used to be...

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Frankly, I don't care because the only "exit polling" that matters is the one done in the voting booth...

Point taken.

 

It's the same way in authoritarian countries.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

They're still counting the votes in Ohio.

 

Um, they are. Maybe he shouldn't have said it, though, I'll give you that.