The Conservative Media Is Lying To You

[Direckshun]

Conor Friedersdorf ****ing nails it. If you bathe in the muck of the vast majority of conservative media -- if you read FoxNews.com more than any other site, if you hail Mark Levin as brilliant, if you live and die by Drudge...

Then you are being lied to.

There are plenty of conservative sources that simply have a conservative view on the world -- the Wall Street Journal, for instance. But that's distinct from the profitable media empire that sells propaganda damn near 24/7.

Example #1, since it comes up so much in this forum: the Drudge Report.

How many times did the Drudge Report link to Nate Silver, who absolutely crushed his election predictions? Zero.
How many times did the Drudge Report link to Dick Morris? A dozen.

And yet you bought it. You might recall sitting there watching the election returns, certain that Romney would win because for months you've been inundated with Republican whores like Morris telling you what you wanted to hear -- "Obama's a paper tiger," "his campaign is getting desperate," "absolutely nobody I know is voting Obama," "I see more Romney yard signs," "look at this outlier poll that favors Romney"...

Then the results come in, largely how the vast majority of polls told us they would.

You were misinformed. Massively. And it's not just limited to election returns. On climate change, tax rates, income inequality, immigration, healthcare, energy, foreign policy (in particular the Middle East), gay rights for the longest time, and of course Obama himself... You are being sold a bullshit platter that leaves you just as misinformed as you were about the prospective election results.

The biggest offender, of course, is Fox News. Not that they're the most egregious violators of conservative propaganda, but they're by far the most pervasive and the most influential.

You trust Fox News because you believe they are simply reporting from a conservative point of view. That's not true. They are actively selling bullshit. This election and Rove's meltdown on the evening of the 6th is proof. This is an organization that is financially and professionally tied to the Republican Party. Fox News' overlords donate heavily to the GOP. Many Republican candidates for the Presidency either end up or originate as Fox News contributors. This is not an independent outlet in any shape or form, it is a direct arm of the Republican Party.

Get out of this bubble. Set Google News as your homepage. And embrace the next four years as an opportunity to find out what you actually believe, rather than simply adopting the narrative of charlatans.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...d-file/264855/

How Conservative Media Lost to the MSM and Failed the Rank and File
Nate Silver was right. His ideological antagonists were wrong. And that's just the beginning of the right's self-created information disadvantage.
By Conor Friedersdorf
Nov 7 2012, 6:30 AM ET

Before rank-and-file conservatives ask, "What went wrong?", they should ask themselves a question every bit as important: "Why were we the last to realize that things were going wrong for us?"

Barack Obama just trounced a Republican opponent for the second time. But unlike four years ago, when most conservatives saw it coming, Tuesday's result was, for them, an unpleasant surprise. So many on the right had predicted a Mitt Romney victory, or even a blowout -- Dick Morris, George Will, and Michael Barone all predicted the GOP would break 300 electoral votes. Joe Scarborough scoffed at the notion that the election was anything other than a toss-up. Peggy Noonan insisted that those predicting an Obama victory were ignoring the world around them. Even Karl Rove, supposed political genius, missed the bulls-eye. These voices drove the coverage on Fox News, talk radio, the Drudge Report, and conservative blogs.

Those audiences were misinformed.

Outside the conservative media, the narrative was completely different. Its driving force was Nate Silver, whose performance forecasting Election '08 gave him credibility as he daily explained why his model showed that President Obama enjoyed a very good chance of being reelected. Other experts echoed his findings. Readers of The New York Times, The Atlantic, and other "mainstream media" sites besides knew the expert predictions, which have been largely born out. The conclusions of experts are not sacrosanct. But Silver's expertise was always a better bet than relying on ideological hacks like Morris or the anecdotal impressions of Noonan.


Sure, Silver could've wound up wrong. But people who rejected the possibility of his being right? They were operating at a self-imposed information disadvantage.

Conservatives should be familiar with its contours. For years, they've been arguing that liberal control of media and academia confers one advantage: Folks on the right can't help but be familiar with the thinking of liberals, whereas leftists can operate entirely within a liberal cocoon. This analysis was offered to explain why liberal ideas were growing weaker and would be defeated.

Today?

It is easy to close oneself off inside a conservative echo chamber. And right-leaning outlets like Fox News and Rush Limbaugh's show are far more intellectually closed than CNN or public radio. If you're a rank-and-file conservative, you're probably ready to acknowledge that ideologically friendly media didn't accurately inform you about Election 2012. Some pundits engaged in wishful thinking; others feigned confidence in hopes that it would be a self-fulfilling prophecy; still others decided it was smart to keep telling right-leaning audiences what they wanted to hear.

But guess what?

You haven't just been misinformed about the horse race. Since the very beginning of the election cycle, conservative media has been failing you. With a few exceptions, they haven't tried to rigorously tell you the truth, or even to bring you intellectually honest opinion. What they've done instead helps to explain why the right failed to triumph in a very winnable election.

Why do you keep putting up with it?

Conservatives were at a disadvantage because Romney supporters like Jennifer Rubin and Hugh Hewitt saw it as their duty to spin constantly for their favored candidate rather than being frank about his strengths and weaknesses. What conservative Washington Post readers got, when they traded in Dave Weigel for Rubin, was a lot more hackery and a lot less informed about the presidential election.

Conservatives were at an information disadvantage because so many right-leaning outlets wasted time on stories the rest of America dismissed as nonsense. WorldNetDaily brought you birtherism. Forbes brought you Kenyan anti-colonialism. National Review obsessed about an imaginary rejection of American exceptionalism, misrepresenting an Obama quote in the process, and Andy McCarthy was interviewed widely about his theory that Obama, aka the Drone Warrior in Chief, allied himself with our Islamist enemies in a "Grand Jihad" against America. Seriously?

Conservatives were at a disadvantage because their information elites pandered in the most cynical, self-defeating ways, treating would-be candidates like Sarah Palin and Herman Cain as if they were plausible presidents rather than national jokes who'd lose worse than George McGovern.

How many months were wasted on them?

How many hours of Glenn Beck conspiracy theories did Fox News broadcast to its viewers? How many hours of transparently mindless Sean Hannity content is still broadcast daily? Why don't Americans trust Republicans on foreign policy as they once did? In part because conservatism hasn't grappled with the foreign-policy failures of George W. Bush. A conspiracy of silence surrounds the subject. Romney could neither run on the man's record nor repudiate it. The most damaging Romney gaffe of the campaign, where he talked about how the 47 percent of Americans who pay no income taxes are a lost cause for Republicans? Either he was unaware that many of those people are Republican voters, or was pandering to GOP donors who are misinformed. Either way, bad information within the conservative movement was to blame.

In conservative fantasy-land, Richard Nixon was a champion of ideological conservatism, tax cuts are the only way to raise revenue, adding neoconservatives to a foreign-policy team reassures American voters, Benghazi was a winning campaign issue, Clint Eastwood's convention speech was a brilliant triumph, and Obama's America is a place where black kids can beat up white kids with impunity. Most conservative pundits know better than this nonsense -- not that they speak up against it. They see criticizing their own side as a sign of disloyalty. I see a coalition that has lost all perspective, partly because there's no cost to broadcasting or publishing inane bullshit. In fact, it's often very profitable. A lot of cynical people have gotten rich broadcasting and publishing red meat for movement conservative consumption.

On the biggest political story of the year, the conservative media just got its ass handed to it by the mainstream media. And movement conservatives, who believe the MSM is more biased and less rigorous than their alternatives, have no way to explain how their trusted outlets got it wrong, while the New York Times got it right. Hint: The Times hired the most rigorous forecaster it could find.

It ought to be an eye-opening moment.

But I expect that it'll be quickly forgotten, that none of the conservatives who touted a polling conspiracy will be discredited, and that the right will continue to operate at an information disadvantage. After all, it's not like they'll trust the analysis of a non-conservative like me more than the numerous fellow conservatives who constantly tell them things that turn out not to be true.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

I'd quibble with this here or there, but fair enough.

Me too. He's every bit as bad as Carter.

[Radar Chief]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

The "complicit MSM" reported polling numbers exactly as they were.
The conservative media lied about them, cast undue doubt on the pollsters, and regularly cited outliers.

They also pushed Obama’s agenda for him and worked to cover up his failures.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

I'd quibble with this here or there, but fair enough.



Actually Obama kicked the shit out of Romney with centrists, which is a different category than independents. Independents over the past four years became a misnomer because essentially a bunch of Republicans with Republican views got so upset with the party they renounced their membership, but still vote in line.

That's the argument that should be made (though I don't think its an entirely accurate way of making it).

I disagree that independants are just jaded Republicans. It's a quaint way to disregard a beating amongst those that don't claim a party affiliation (as is the case with a ton of people who fall on both sides of the political spectrum), but it's not true.

What may be true, however, is that the electorate has made a slight shift to the left due to the energy created among the D voting base. In so doing, it has convinced what were formerly independents to call themselves Democrats (afterall, it's a popular thing to do right now with the coolest President since Kennedy in office).

In essence, the 'independent gap' is somewhat explained and offset by the rise in Democratic turnout. It seems very likely that the Democrats simply turned some independents into Democrats over the last 2 election cycles.

That said - good luck keeping them. Independents are the least informed, least reliable voters in the world. When you no longer have a guy that looks like a badass with his jacket slung open and a cig hanging off his lip as your candidate, you're going to lose some of the easily swayed that have so readily answered his call.

The answer for the Republicans is very simple - they need to inject some youth and enthusiasm into this party to try to inspire that same 're-branding' of independents. They need competent young candidates with experience and cross-over appeal.

They need Marco Rubio and Nikki Haley. Here's hoping neither of them do anything stupid over the next 4 years and can avoid saying rape too loudly.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Radar Chief

’02, after the midterms when the Republicans picked up House seats.
I remember it as well, Republicans trying to tell Democrats how to fix their party. What did the Democrats do? They certainly didn’t follow Republicans advice, they doubled down on the rhetoric like Republicans want your grandma eating dog food and this “war on women” .

I have never seen a combination of perfect pitch and perfect idiocy like the "War on Women".

You know those times when a coach calls a screen pass right at the side of the field where the defense is sending a blitz? All hell breaks lose and the RB blows past a flat-footed safety for a 60 yard score before anyone knows how or what just happened.

That was it with the 'War on Women.' The Democrats knew that Obama would appeal to women voters and started early on with it. They kept hammering at it with some effect, but not overwhelming effect.

Then came Todd ****ing Aiken. And man did that snowball gather momentum fast. Todd Aiken was the blitz right into the face of the screen. He was the absolute worst thing that could happen at the absolute worst time. Then the entire Republican Party came under attack and suddenly in the span of 6 weeks, Romney had bled off 5/6 points in the national polls.

With a great late rally, he made it close again (and don't let the Ds sway you here, he did make it close), but there was just immeasurable damage done. Todd Akin, Mourdock and the early emphasis on abortion, etc... in the primary campaign was essentially a severed femoral artery. There was just no recovering from it, no matter how tight the turnicate got.

There was a prefect storm of electoral events here that buried the Republicans. It was a failure of the Party that led to these results, not a failure of many of their fundamental ideas.

Put these ideas behind the right candidates (and put the wrong candidates in the bottom of the !@#$ing ocean...jesus, Aiken), and they'll still resonate.

But they can't continue to lead with their chins on social issues. That has to take a back-seat and really needs to be softened at least a little bit.

[Radar Chief]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I have never seen a combination of perfect pitch and perfect idiocy like the "War on Women".

You know those times when a coach calls a screen pass right at the side of the field where the defense is sending a blitz? All hell breaks lose and the RB blows past a flat-footed safety for a 60 yard score before anyone knows how or what just happened.

That was it with the 'War on Women.' The Democrats knew that Obama would appeal to women voters and started early on with it. They kept hammering at it with some effect, but not overwhelming effect.

Then came Todd ****ing Aiken. And man did that snowball gather momentum fast. Todd Aiken was the blitz right into the face of the screen. He was the absolute worst thing that could happen at the absolute worst time. Then the entire Republican Party came under attack and suddenly in the span of 6 weeks, Romney had bled off 5/6 points in the national polls.

With a great late rally, he made it close again (and don't let the Ds sway you here, he did make it close), but there was just immeasurable damage done. Todd Akin, Mourdock and the early emphasis on abortion, etc... in the primary campaign was essentially a severed femoral artery. There was just no recovering from it, no matter how tight the turnicate got.

There was a prefect storm of electoral events here that buried the Republicans. It was a failure of the Party that led to these results, not a failure of many of their fundamental ideas.

Put these ideas behind the right candidates (and put the wrong candidates in the bottom of the !@#$ing ocean...jesus, Aiken), and they'll still resonate.

But they can't continue to lead with their chins on social issues. That has to take a back-seat and really needs to be softened at least a little bit.

Well said, agreed.
The thing that just amazes me here isn’t that the Dems tried it, nor that the MSM pushed the rhetoric, its I thought there was enough alternative media out there and people paying attention to it that these tactics wouldn’t work. I was wrong.

[DaFace]

If there are people who truly only get their news from FOX and Drudge, then I think the article is spot on. I'd really hope that people aren't so trusting to really assume that those sources aren't necessarily an unbiased viewpoint.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Radar Chief

Well said, agreed.
The thing that just amazes me here isn’t that the Dems tried it, nor that the MSM pushed the rhetoric, its I thought there was enough alternative media out there and people paying attention to it that these tactics wouldn’t work. I was wrong.

Keep saying rape and you'll always lose. I don't expect the electorate to look past it - why should they?

Mourdock shouldn't have lost and wouldn't have lost but for the blood that Akin put in the water (his comments were actually quite fair, even if you don't agree with them). But again, perfect storm stuff, you just can't say what he said.

I pointed it out to a friend of mine - if the word 'rape' is involved in a question or answer - run. It's not designed to engender a response, but fuel emotion.

It's not new and it's not specific to either side of the spectrum. Bernard Shaw fully and finally ended Michael Dukakis's political career with his 'rape' question during the '88 election. Dukakis gave a reasonable answer when looked at in context...but it just doesn't matter.

The Democrats telegraphed the hell out of their haymaker and the idiot Republicans just stuck their faces right in there to get smoked.

It was just a horrendously bad job by the RNC. It cost some bad candidates their careers (Aiken) and it probably finished off a handful of good ones as well (Mourdock, Romney).

I'd say live and learn...but somehow I fear they won't.

[penchief]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Maddow's a legitimate commentator. I don't know how anybody could even argue that.

She's damn good, too. Not a hack at all. Her arguments are well-reasoned, well-researched, and factual. She never shies away from a good debate. She's always inviting different opinions on her show and is willing to learn. Unfortunately because she is sharp and well-prepared she doesn't get many takers. She lays out complicated issues in a way that makes them easier to digest.

She is more than just opinion. She is very informative. I think a lot of righties, republicans, and conservatives could learn something by watching her show but I know that is ridiculous notion...

[vailpass]

Get a life
Get medical help

[The_Grand_Illusion]

The radical leftists of the 60's and their culture they have been pushing for decades is now the majority. Lot's of deception over decades had to happen to get us to this point. The thread title is nothing but mere projection.

TGI

[Brock]

Originally Posted by The_Grand_Illusion

The radical leftists of the 60's and their culture they have been pushing for decades is now the majority. Lot's of deception over decades had to happen to get us to this point. The thread title is nothing but mere projection.

TGI

Them damn beatles! And other longhairs!

[Radar Chief]

Originally Posted by The_Grand_Illusion

The radical leftists of the 60's and their culture they have been pushing for decades is now the majority. Lot's of deception over decades had to happen to get us to this point. The thread title is nothing but mere projection.

TGI

Projection? I don’t think its at all inaccurate to say that right wing media lied, though that is only half the story as the left wing MSM lied just was well. Just more people fell for their lies than the right wing media’s.

[Pitt Gorilla]

Originally Posted by Dave Lane

Is there video of Roves meltdown? I'd love to see it. Been at my farm and haven't had a chance to watch it during election nite but heard it was awesome

i watched Fox News exclusively on election night. His refusal to believe the numbers was embarrassing. The rest of the clowns on there were pretty entertaining as well.

[RedDread]

Originally Posted by J Diddy

Every other reference has magically disappeared. The really good part starts at the 2 minute mark from FOX. The best breakdown is on dailshow.com

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/we...rl-rove-s-math

[The_Grand_Illusion]

Originally Posted by Radar Chief

Projection? I don’t think its at all inaccurate to say that right wing media lied, though that is only half the story as the left wing MSM lied just was well. Just more people fell for their lies than the right wing media’s.

I agree to a point but I don't think the right wing media thought this country had gone this far left like it played out. You are correct, more people fell for the left wing media as well. This president has been a disaster on many levels and that was downplayed, dismissed or even covered up. Much of it from the left wing media and parroted here. I see things through the prism of freedom versus tyranny and were definitely trending on the tyranny side but that's how this culture has been trending since the radical leftists of the 60's have taken over our culture.

TGI