I would prefer not to address this in the pit as I am seeking clarification not vilification but the rules say the Pit is the place if you want to question the actions of a moderator so the Pit it is.
You locked this thread wherein I expressed, that in my humble opinion, I could not understand what The Drudge Report was so excited about or what the media were so exercised about with respect to the startling revelation that network television news has a liberal bias. This is, to the best of my knowledge, accepted as more or less the lay of the land by most breathing consumers of news. Possibly I am wrong and most network news does not list to port but that is my humble opinion.
These are the topic guidelines for IMHO -
I was heretofore unaware that evincing some degree of sarcasm in expressing an opinion in the IMHO forum automatically made it pit worthy material.
This was your first and final response in the thread.
So questioning (sarcastically) why getting upset about the liberal bias of the press is sort of silly gets me “locked down” and sends me directly to The Pit. Do not pass GO. Do not collect $200. I thought one of the main points of IMHO was to be able to express my opinion about my impression of things within the limits of acceptable language and propriety. Could you explain to me how I transgressed the boundaries of acceptable IMHO etiquette so that I may go and sin no more in the future.
Eh, FWIW, I read it as a rant. Biting sarcasm, no real OP to discuss, nothing like “how do y’all feel about this?” Hard to discuss the topic of “Why is this news and why are the news organizations so exercised about it?” You expressed your humble opinion, but you didn’t seem to be inviting anybody else to do so. [shrug]
And, it was on a proven hot-button topic, the old reliable “Liberal vs. Conservative” thing, practically guaranteed to end in tears sooner or later.
I imagined the the open question I posed at the end of my post inviting comments to explain why this was such a big deal would be construed as an inviation to discuss the issue.
No. It was a statement of bemusement at the fact that network media entities could (purportedly) get so worked up about something that, for better or worse, is accepted as a matter of fact by most consumers of the network news. The amusing part was that something that was such old news to the point of being a “so what” issue was being trumpeted by the Drudge Report as being this explosive expose.
But thanks anyway for your explanation it was real informative.
Fine. I am now apprised of the fact that as part of the IMHO forum guidelines, posting an opinion expressing puzzlement about an issue and ending with an open question asking for any explanations to remedy my confusion is insufficiently “inviting” for those who may wish to take issue with my opinion and is thus not acceptable for IMHO. Thank you for the additional clarification.
“Common knowledge” my middle-of-the-road ass. That was a partisan rant if ever there was such a thing, and with nothing more than an invitation to validate your opinion to cap it off. If you seriously want to inquire whether the rest of us believe Katie Couric is sleeping with Karl Marx, try asking instead of ranting.
Das Kapital in the newsroom! Oohh… Such a pretty straw man. I see you’ve been giving him quite the whacking.
It is my humble opinion and I do take it (in my opinion) as a matter of “common knowledge” that, to the extent liberal and conservative orientations exist, that most network media does have a liberal tilt. This tilt does not concern me all that much as it is (IMO again) the natural consequence of those attracted to the job of being a reporter and the schools and social sets they come out of. I think the networks do an admirable job in the main with the resources at their disposal.
What is surprising to me (again IMO) is that this is big news or even a topic of serious debate. It’s a “so what” issue to me and I’m suprised that the Drudge Report thinks it’s big news. If you think that the national networks do not have a liberal tilt and that my opinion that this is "common knowledge is full of horsepucky I stand eager to be corrected. Lets start a thread in GD and let the teeming millions have their say.
I read the original post in the IMHO thread referred to by astro, and it seems to me more like a rant than an attempt at discussion. Phrased differently, it could have been a GD or IMHO thread.
The difference? I wasn’t quite finished moderating(it’s a neverending quest for truth, justice ad nauseum), and had yet to move that particular thread to MPSIMS.
Hey! Who said that it was my wish to have the thread reappear?
Good luck with your debate. I hope it doesn’t start another liberal vs. conservative screaming match.
Sounds like a great debate to me. Fairness and Accuracy in reporting have documented the rampant conservative bias in the media. This is unexceptional and unsurprising, as the networks depend upon advertising revenue for their existence and their big business paymasters are not known for their liberal views.
Oh yeah, and who owns the media? **
(Of course the above is conservative-baiting. The real point is that astro appeared to have (perhaps unknowingly) strayed into GD territory.)
The thread in question takes a subject that has been hashed, re-hashed, mashed, crashed, and fried to a crisp in GD, then gets all sarcastic about it, and tells me that my differing opinion is wrong.
Frankly, when I considered replying before it was locked, I realized that it just going to get me pissy, and that you obviously didn’t care about my opinion–since your’s is “common knowledge”.
