CBS NEWS: FAIR AND BALANCED?
Is it just me or has anyone else noticed something dramatically unfolding at CBS news, namely that their news segments are becoming extraordinarily, bending over backwards, fair? Is it moving out of the editorial game and back to its roots into the news gathering game? Of course, they would deny that they were ever onesided ideologically but ahem, cough, cough, most of us conservatives would beg to differ.
But now?
First I started noticing that 60 Minutes was offering two sides to their stories, even the hit and run bad businessman stories. Some of them would have been pretty easy to stop half way, when the blood was up and we in the audience were all angry at the polluting, tax evading, scheming, white businessman. Instead, they would take it a step further, show the other side and totally disarm the viewers.
A few months ago, a CBS producer named Shawn Efran produced a segment about Christians in Iraq before and after Saddam Hussein. It was so rich in irony and so educational in general that I was left speechless. This was a truly entertaining, informative and highly relevant segment. But the old CBS would have driven the point home with a hammer and nail, instead it just left the document on the table for us to peruse at our own pace and draw our own conclusions. I was left thinking how ridiculous it is send our boys to die to bring democracy to a country that will promptly use it to vote democracy out of existence again. But there was no push and shove, it was all just show and tell.
Then last night The CBS Evening News With Katie Couric ran a Dennis Quaid piece, with the famous actor testifying before congress, with tears in his eyes about a product labeling issue that almost cost the life of his babies. A good piece, but CBS didn’t stop. It immediately showed a congressman on the other side of the issue, with a tear in his eye as well. It blew me away. It took an open minded, intellectually curious producer, time and skill to weigh the factors in that story, edit it appropriately and show us in just seconds the real dilemma. The producer, whomever it may have been, could have taken the easy way out and the popular way out. He or she didn’t.
I suspect that something is going on at CBS, that this is all no coincidence, that someone has decided, “let’s just ignore the critics and pontificators and do straight news stories as carefully and accurately as we can and let’s just see what happens.” Professionalism in any industry is wonderful to behold. Meanwhile, to whomever made that decision or was in the board room that day….. “Congratulations, it shows.”
Doug Wead 
I am surprised to see you write this. While they may be attempting to have a somewhat cleaner approach.,you must remember that they are being driven by advertising dollars, sensationalism and political agendas (ask anyone who supported Ron Paul and they will tell you that the Major media both left and right have had a great time manipulating the campaigns). in fact, seems to me most of the news media is well driven and manilpulated by the same powers they repudiate.
Again, they may be making some small effort but one swallow does not make it spring.
Ah, quizaxehatrack, you old cynic, you… As “leave it to Bob” said, “Baby steps!” Anything that promotes a higher professionalism is to be applauded and encouraged.
(yawn) Ron Paul was ignored because he led a freak fringe campaign that only drew 14 delegates.
Blaming the news media for his failures is the same as Rev. Jeremiah Wright blaming white America for black America’s problems.
CBS news has been irrelevant since before Rather was finally drummed out for being a partisan lib hack instead of an objective journalist.
I can only hope for its continued failure with that bobblehead Katie at the helm, who should be hosting cooking segments or sucking up to celebs on morning TV
I like what Zig Ziglar says. He reads his bible in the morning to see what the good guys are up to and his newspaper to see what the bad guys are up to. I don’t take our local paper because the Courier Journal in Louisville has always been unashamedly liberal. I have 3 children under 3 years old so that rules out the nightly news. I guess I get my news from talk radio and bloggers.
I wonder if the great divide among the democrats is causing this straight laced reporting by CBS. The stations don’t want to seem too biased toward any story so they just report the facts more often than not.
Oh please, getting your news from talk radio is like hiring Michael Jackson to babysit your kids.
Blogs are far too subjective to be credible news sources.
You have an internet connection. Any of a number of conservative leaning newspapers and journals are on line for you to read.
Oh please, getting your news from talk radio is like hiring Michael Jackson to babysit your kids.
That is a good one, David.
Blogs are far too subjective to be credible news sources.
I would tend to agree.
Here in Canada, I reason somewhat liberal leaning news prevails most of the time.
If it’s important enough, someone will tell you about it my friend. I do catch Town Halls online and Fox News website. I run a couple businesses so I’m not looking to emerse myself in it. Always a lot of anger in your comments Dblack. You know it only hurts the vessel. I like your quick wit and the sarcasm but not on every comment.
Sorry, raleyb, I see life for what it is, not for what I hope it could be. Hence, I don’t walk around with blinders on and a goofy grin on my face pushing peaceloveandflowers.
There’s a lot to be angry about, especially toward the electorate. You have people who are libertarians who think they are conservatives and back a crackpot like Ron Paul, who thinks people should be able to smoke pot recreationally, who believes in junk science like global warming, and who’s an anti-Israeli isolationist.
That’s right, “non-interventionism” is a code word for anti-Semitism, because what he’s really saying is that we should pull out of the Middle East and abandon our military alliance with Israel.
To me, that’s anti-Semitism. You are either for Israel or against her. There’s no gray area.
So I’ve just cited three strikes against him. Shall I offer more?
Please remember that libertarians are not conservatives and are more closely aligned with liberals. The desire to have illegal drugs legalized so we can have more drugged out criminals roaming our streets is pure liberalism.
I’m a conservative that is virulently anti-crime, pro-police, and pro-death penalty. I also don’t have a problem when cops beat up suspects that resist arrest.
I agree with most of your comments dbalck. Deep down we may have a lot in common. I don’t agree with the Paul folks on the war or Israel. I just am very much against our government running my affairs. I don’t like the idea of legalizing drugs, however, I don’t like government telling me to wear a helmet or seat belt-even though I choose. to. I’m all for the authorities and do believe they are asked to police us but stripped of their power. I played softball and did ministry in prisons and I’ve seen reformed men- I’ve seen many more who belong in prison for life and are unwilling ot reform. The major reason I’m attracted to Paul ( I supported Huckabee and Thompson early in the primaries) is because of his fiscal conservativeness and pro business- pro market philosophies. The fact that he is pro life and pro capital punishment which not all Libertarians are- is a bonus. Republicans are no longer conservatives, so Paul can do nothing but help the party move way right on fiscal and economic issues.
I HATE TO REPEAT MYSELF BUT, WHO OR WHOM CONTROLLS MEDIA CONTENT ? WHAT IS THERE AGENDA ?
By scorpi2000 – Apr 17th, 2008 at 9:45 pm EDT
THE MEDIA IS CLEARLY A POWERFUL TOOL FOR COMUNICATING INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC. ITS AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY INFORMING US OF PENDING DANGER, AND KEEPING US INFORMED AND UP TO DATE WITH ISSUES AND EVENTS THAT EFFECT OUR EVERY DAY LIVES.
DO THEY HAVE THE POWER TO EFFECT PEOPLES OPINIONS AND CHANGE THE RESULTS OF AN ELECTION ?
I WISH SOMEONE WOULD BRING UP THIS ISSUE ON ONE OF THE MAJOR NEWS STATIONS AND LETS SEE HOW THEY REACT.
I think the media is owned and or controLled by the same group that wants to stay in power. The will or wants of the majority of the American people are secondary to the goal of the controlling elite. The media is a tool they use to convince the public to support thier agenda. Example: All tv and radio stations are owned by someone. Who ever that is has control over the content and views of its comentators. Who ever controls the flow of information also controls what most people believe. So for example: Bush was trying to get every one to support him in his efforts to invade Iraq and many people were against it including the U.N. and many other countries. Anyone that protested his desicion were demonized, accussed of being anti American, unpatiotic, and publicly portrayed by the media as the vilian. If I remember correctly some comentators were even fired for voicing thier opinion against going to war. Many of the politicians who actualy disagreed with going to war, were afraid they would be portrayed as being unamerican if they voted against it. Afraid that the media would demonize them and destroy thier political carriers.
I also remember when Bush was running for office and the media said he was loosing, he said he had some friends in the media, made a phone call, and before my eyes the media changed thier position.
WHO HAS THE POWER TO CONTROL THE MEDIA ? AND WHAT IS THIER AGENDA ?
Thanks
SCORPI2000
“AND WHAT IS THIER AGENDA ?”
To befuddle and rile paranoids like you.
What a shame Wead’s blog has to attract so many tinfoil hat nutjobs.