# PBS, politics, current events ... potential for bias? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 7, 2012, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166 "2012-05-07T14:30:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![mister\_nyx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@mister\_nyx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mister_nyx)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2012, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/81 "2012-05-17T21:10:26Z")
> [@What\_the](#): > > Don’t be a hater gang… educate me on my embarrasment, point-missing and disingenousness. > > Please, I’m serious. Are the points I’m missing the canned liberal responses to all liberal media suggetions?? You ought to be embarrassed for not realizing that the entire point of political commentators is having political opinions. I assumed you were doing a parody of the absolute stupidest of right-wingers. You know, the type that forward emails claiming that Obama had the flag removed from Air Force One. If you are being honest and not doing a parody, this is what you did: Without a shred of evidence for any kind of actual bias, you tried to argue that PBS’s news coverage is biased, because of the political affiliations that you made up and have no evidence for. (Even though their political affiliations, if you actually knew them, are not evidence of bias anyway.) Your opinion is based entirely on “facts” that you made up. If you go around believing things without evidence, and consider people pointing that out to be a “canned response” rather than a definitive refutation, you ought to be embarrassed indeed. Because it means that, for you, getting caught making things up is not a one-off mistake, but rather a routine. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/82 "2012-05-18T01:12:56Z")
> [@mister\_nyx](#): > > You ought to be embarrassed for not realizing that the entire point of political commentators is having political opinions. > > I assumed you were doing a parody of the absolute stupidest of right-wingers. You know, the type that forward emails claiming that Obama had the flag removed from Air Force One. If you are being honest and not doing a parody, this is what you did: Without a shred of evidence for any kind of actual bias, you tried to argue that PBS’s news coverage is biased, because of the political affiliations that you made up and have no evidence for. (Even though their political affiliations, if you actually knew them, are not evidence of bias anyway.) Your opinion is based entirely on “facts” that you made up. > > If you go around believing things without evidence, and consider people pointing that out to be a “canned response” rather than a definitive refutation, you ought to be embarrassed indeed. Because it means that, for you, getting caught making things up is not a one-off mistake, but rather a routine. This. And, [this.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=651622) A routine indeed. ---
**Author:** ![What\_the](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f4b2a3/32.png) [@What\_the](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_the)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/83 "2012-05-18T13:18:41Z")
> [@saoirse](#): > > I’m not sure you are serious any more, but you could start by producing one example of what you believe to be liberal bias. From Charlie Rose, say. He’s on for an hour every weeknight and something like two hours every morning. There must be something, if there’s a liberal bias. My OP did not rest on the fact that Rose is or isn’t biased. It named alot of names and asked for some intellectual honesty on who you think most of them voted for. So…who do you think Bill Moyers voted for? Feel free to opine on all of the names listed too. ---
**Author:** ![saoirse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@saoirse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saoirse)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/84 "2012-05-18T13:20:52Z")
> [@What\_the](#): > > My OP did not rest on the fact that Rose is or isn’t biased. It named alot of names and asked for some intellectual honesty on who you think most of them voted for. > > So…who do you think Bill Moyers voted for? Feel free to opine on all of the names listed too. This is America, where we use the Australian Ballot. Can you point to any instance of bias by any of the people you have mentioned? When you do so, I will respond. ---
**Author:** ![What\_the](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f4b2a3/32.png) [@What\_the](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_the)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/85 "2012-05-18T13:23:11Z")
> [@mister\_nyx](#): > > You ought to be embarrassed for not realizing that the entire point of political commentators is having political opinions. > > I assumed you were doing a parody of the absolute stupidest of right-wingers. You know, the type that forward emails claiming that Obama had the flag removed from Air Force One. If you are being honest and not doing a parody, this is what you did: Without a shred of evidence for any kind of actual bias, you tried to argue that PBS’s news coverage is biased, because of the political affiliations that you made up and have no evidence for. (Even though their political affiliations, if you actually knew them, are not evidence of bias anyway.) Your opinion is based entirely on “facts” that you made up. > > If you go around believing things without evidence, and consider people pointing that out to be a “canned response” rather than a definitive refutation, you ought to be embarrassed indeed. Because it means that, for you, getting caught making things up is not a one-off mistake, but rather a routine. No… you should be embarrased or worse to think that I don’t realize that political commentators comentate on politics. Are you conceding that you believe PBS should be dominated by the opinions of Democrats? Now … make the list of names and give me your honest opinion on their political opinions. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/86 "2012-05-18T13:26:21Z")
> [@What\_the](#): > > No… you should be embarrased or worse to think that I don’t realize that political commentators comentate on politics. Then you should be embarrassed to pretend otherwise, and your thread is based on that pretense. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/87 "2012-05-18T13:40:20Z")
Didn’t know they comentated. Thought they just commented. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/88 "2012-05-18T13:51:54Z")
The do produce a lot of comentatement. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/89 "2012-05-18T13:52:00Z")
> [@What\_the](#): > > My OP did not rest on the fact that Rose is or isn’t biased. It named alot of names and asked for some intellectual honesty on who you think most of them voted for. You got intellectual honesty. “Intellectual honesty” does not mean “agree with me or you’re a liar”. We told you that trying to judge bias in reporting by guessing who various commentators voted for is a pointless exercise because it both presumes that voting for a party leads to reporting bias in their favor, and - worse - that our unsupported guesses as to what’s going on in strangers’ heads have any objective validity or substantive worth as a critique of media bias. That was entirely honest. > [@](#): > > So…who do you think Bill Moyers voted for? Feel free to opine on all of the names listed too. I refer you to my comment above. I have no idea who Moyers voted for, and my wild guesses on the subject would be just that: wild guesses. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/90 "2012-05-18T13:59:22Z")
Bill Moyers is a sensible, intelligent, and well informed person. Therefore, I would be very surprised if he had not voted for Obama, like the rest of us who are sensible, intelligent and well informed. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/91 "2012-05-18T14:04:20Z")
> [@What\_the](#): > > Are you conceding that you believe PBS should be dominated by the opinions of Democrats? Could you please supply any proof whatsoever of who these folks voted for? That seems like a necessary prerequisite to taking your goddamn ridiculous OP seriously. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/92 "2012-05-18T15:03:14Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Bill Moyers is a sensible, intelligent, and well informed person. Therefore, I would be very surprised if he had not voted for Obama, like the rest of us who are sensible, intelligent and well informed. I think this is exactly the problem. What the…!!! is upset because PBS hasn’t given equal weight to both sides of the Birther debate, or equal time to whether US debt default would be good/bad for the country. If they don’t devote 50% of their air time to right wing insanity they are biased. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/93 "2012-05-18T15:55:28Z")
Well, yeah, but on the other hand… ---
**Author:** ![Yumblie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/76d3ee/32.png) [@Yumblie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yumblie)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/94 "2012-05-18T16:00:49Z")
> [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > I think this is exactly the problem. What the…!!! is upset because PBS hasn’t given equal weight to both sides of the Birther debate, or equal time to whether US debt default would be good/bad for the country. If they don’t devote 50% of their air time to right wing insanity they are biased. I think it goes broader than that. These days, anyone who votes Republican seems to agree with everything they do and argue everything in their favor. He expects Democrats to do this too. Therefore, in a “balanced” argument, you have an equal amount of Republicans and Democrats chanting their mantras past each other. Something that a lot of Republicans can’t seem to grasp is that Democrats don’t do that. Democrats can agree with Republicans on things and disagree with other Democrats on things. There’s no purity test, no bills that 100% of Democrats voted the same way on. This is why he wants to know who they voted for, so he can determine what “team” they’re on, and therefore sum up their position on all things. He imagines that if Democrat voters outnumber Republican voters that means his team loses and the panel is biased. The very thought of some Democrat presenting an argument critical of Obama or in favor of tax cuts doesn’t even seem to cross his mind, because that kind of thing certainly doesn’t happen on the other side. ---
**Author:** ![saoirse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@saoirse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saoirse)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/95 "2012-05-18T16:08:51Z")
> [@Yumblie](#): > > Something that a lot of Republicans can’t seem to grasp is that Democrats don’t do that. Democrats can agree with Republicans on things and disagree with other Democrats on things. Impossible. As soon as enough Democrats agree with a policy to make it law, it becomes a “Democrat” proposal (Republicans are incapable of constructing an adjective out of a noun, because they’re stupid), and Republicans identify it as the death of freedom and the coming of socialism. The Democrats say it isn’t. The truth must lie somewhere in the middle. ---
**Author:** ![Baracus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/2bfe46/32.png) [@Baracus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baracus)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/96 "2012-05-18T16:26:17Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > Could you please supply any proof whatsoever of who these folks voted for? That seems like a necessary prerequisite to taking your goddamn ridiculous OP seriously. That’s irrelevant. They _potentially_ could have all voted for Democrats, thus there is the _potential_ for bias. Also, this whole thread is _potentially_ pointless. ---
**Author:** ![mister\_nyx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@mister\_nyx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mister_nyx)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/97 "2012-05-18T20:05:59Z")
> [@What\_the](#): > > No… you should be embarrased or worse to think that I don’t realize that political commentators comentate on politics. Believe me, dude, I _would_ be very much embarrassed for you if I didn’t think you were still presenting a liberal parody of a lazy-minded, slackjawed Glenn Beck viewer. You’re acting exactly like a liberal caricature. > [@](#): > > Are you conceding that you believe PBS should be dominated by the opinions of Democrats? No. Here again you just make shit up and “just ask questions” about whether it’s true. > [@](#): > > Now … make the list of names and give me your honest opinion on their political opinions. If you really think “make up some facts and then argue on the basis of them” is any kind of sensible way to argue, you’re really confirming an unflattering stereotype of righties. ---
**Author:** ![What\_the](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f4b2a3/32.png) [@What\_the](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_the)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2012, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/98 "2012-05-20T13:25:57Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Then you should be embarrassed to pretend otherwise, and your thread is based on that pretense. It is? Can you point that out to me please. PBS include news, political commentary and other things. My thread is based on my intellectually honest opinion that the names I named appear to be people who would/did/do support one political party. Can’t prove it… just my opinion…do you have one on the names I named? ---
**Author:** ![What\_the](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f4b2a3/32.png) [@What\_the](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_the)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2012, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/99 "2012-05-20T13:32:46Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > You got intellectual honesty. “Intellectual honesty” does not mean “agree with me or you’re a liar”. > > We told you that trying to judge bias in reporting by guessing who various commentators voted for is a pointless exercise because it both presumes that voting for a party leads to reporting bias in their favor, and - worse - that our unsupported guesses as to what’s going on in strangers’ heads have any objective validity or substantive worth as a critique of media bias. That was entirely honest.I refer you to my comment above. > > I have no idea who Moyers voted for, and my wild guesses on the subject would be just that: wild guesses. Never called anybody a “liar”… don’t suggest that please. Nobody can now what’s in anybody elses head … does that mean the possibility of a bias or an agenda doesn’t exist? As for Moyers I’ll make it easy for you… do you think he voted for McCain? If your willing to play along, answer that about any of the others named in the OP. ---
**Author:** ![What\_the](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f4b2a3/32.png) [@What\_the](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_the)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2012, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166/100 "2012-05-20T13:40:21Z")
> [@Yumblie](#): > > I think it goes broader than that. These days, anyone who votes Republican seems to agree with everything they do and argue everything in their favor. He expects Democrats to do this too. Therefore, in a “balanced” argument, you have an equal amount of Republicans and Democrats chanting their mantras past each other. > > Something that a lot of Republicans can’t seem to grasp is that Democrats don’t do that. Democrats can agree with Republicans on things and disagree with other Democrats on things. There’s no purity test, no bills that 100% of Democrats voted the same way on. > > This is why he wants to know who they voted for, so he can determine what “team” they’re on, and therefore sum up their position on all things. He imagines that if Democrat voters outnumber Republican voters that means his team loses and the panel is biased. The very thought of some Democrat presenting an argument critical of Obama or in favor of tax cuts doesn’t even seem to cross his mind, because that kind of thing certainly doesn’t happen on the other side. I disagree with your generalization about all Republicans or Conservatives. I’m glad you made it though… at least a few will recognize that you are as bad as those who generalize about other things that are especially unacceptable here. If you were interested, you might find that there are quite a few things that I agree with Democrats on. Republicans can be critical of their side too…but you’d certainlky be outraged if they dominated the news media. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pbs-politics-current-events-potential-for-bias/621166.md?page=6)