One of the reasons newspaper circulation and TV news ratings are falling is because people no longer trust journalists. They are tired of being mislead as reporters select and distort news coverage to conform to the media’s ideology.

Monday produced two prime examples and both involved slanted opinion surveys.

The first was headlined: “Gap seen between public, General Assembly on recent stances.” The story showcased a Christopher Newport University survey that claimed eight out of ten Virginians supported a new law that would require background checks for all firearms purchasers at gun shows, including those who purchase from private individuals.

The reporter, Jim Nolan, predicts an obstinate Virginia General Assembly will ignore “the public’s strong preferences.” What Nolan doesn’t say is the survey was dishonest and specifically designed to produce an answer supporting additional regulation.

The question read: “Under Virginia law, in order for an individual to be able to purchase a firearm at a gun show from a licensed firearms dealer, that individual must first pass a criminal background check. However, that same individual could purchase a firearm at that same gun show from an unlicensed seller without first having to pass a criminal background check. This is known as the GUNSHOW LOOPHOLE. Do you support changing the law to close this loophole so that anyone purchasing a firearm at a gun show has to pass a criminal background check first or should the law remain as it is?”

There are two methodology problems that distort the results. The term “unlicensed seller” implies someone is skirting the law and gives a negative connotation to the listener. Second, using the pejorative term “GUNSHOW LOOPHOLE” is simply malpractice. Repeating the term “loophole” doubles the dishonesty. The technical term for this, aside from lying, is tainting the sample.

An honest poll uses neutral language. A biased, pro–gun control poll uses loaded language to influence results.

I’m surprised only 80 percent wanted to change the law, maybe a few lobbyists slipped into the sample. American’s don’t like “loopholes” that slippery people use to get by with something.

The only loophole a vast majority of the public would not support eliminating is one that allowed adultery; and even then women would be for elimination.

If the sponsors of the survey — CNU, The Virginian–Pilot and WVEC–TV — had been interested in accuracy, the question would have been:

“Under Virginia law, to purchase a firearm at a gun show from a licensed firearms dealer an individual must first pass a criminal background check. However, that same individual is allowed purchase a firearm at that same gun show from a private citizen without first passing a criminal background check. Do you support changing the law so that a person who makes an private sale at a gun show is required to conduct a criminal background check before he can sell the firearm to another individual or should the law remain as it is?”

This answer would truly reflect public opinion, because the wording accurately and neutrally describes the existing situation. The CNU poll does neither.

If a Republican candidate conducts a poll with questionable wording, he’s blasted for conducting a “push poll.” When the media does it, the poll is a public service.

Example two concerns Obamacare. This story claims strong opposition is at the lowest level since September 2009, once again based on biased questioning: “In general, do you support, oppose or neither support nor oppose the health care reforms that were passed by Congress in March?”
The misleading term is “reforms.” “Reforms” implies something was wrong with the status quo and the law corrected the situation.

Interestingly, the word “reform” does not appear in the Associated Press story, evidently because the term served its purpose in the questionnaire. Yet, even after cooking the books, AP still couldn’t get the desired outcome, so the reporter simply distorts the results.

He doesn’t tell you “strong opposition” levels are three times that of merely “oppose.” Which is the reverse of most polling, where general support or opposition is usually far higher than intense feelings.
Even more damning is that “strongly support” Obamacare is 21 percent, while “somewhat support” is 19 percent, almost a one–to–one ratio.

Successful political consultants know the side with the intense support is the side that wins and opposition to Obama’s “reform” remains far more intense, regardless of temporary polling fluctuations.
Recently the Richmond Times–Dispatch and PolitiFact.com have partnered to produce the “Virginia Truth–O–Meter” where august journalists evaluate the veracity of statements made by politicians after they filter the facts through their own ideological prism. The scale on the meter ranges from true to “pants–on–fire.”

My suggestion for the partnership would be to perform a real public service and broaden its focus to include another category of dangerous fantasists: liberal political reporters.

Michael R. Shannon is a public relations and advertising consultant with corporate, government and political experience around the globe. He can be reached at michael-shannon@comcast.net.

Michael R. Shannon
MANDATE: Message, Media & Public Relations
http://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelrshannon
http://www2.insidenova.com/topics/types/person/tags/michael-r-shannon/

 

WesternFront America

Maybe it is just my natural paranoia at work, but I get the gnawing feeling that somewhere, in a dark corner of the Obama Regime, there is a huddle of “Obamanites” in a whispered discussion in which they examine the possibility of a takeover of the press in the US.

I know, I know. It’s just another conspiracy theory, right? Could be. On the other hand, it IS what a socialist government does — and make no mistake about it — the United States is now a socialist state run by a socialist government… at least until November.

Look, bailing out the newspapers is the same as throwing money down a rat hole. What the papers need to survive is readers – subscribers. The are losing readers and subscribers, in droves, because their readers have finally caught on to what can only be described as the mainstream media’s “leftist agenda.” The bottom line is – readers don’t like it and are no longer reading those “leftist rags.”

If the Government does, indeed, devise some way to bail out the major newspapers in America, two things are certain: One – neither the government nor the newspapers will ever refer to it as a “bailout.” Number two — the government will “own” those newspapers and the government will control what is printed or not printed in them. For a model of how this would work simply check the old Soviet Union.

In the area of North Carolina in which I live there are three daily newspapers. Major newspaper corporations own two of them and one is an independent. All three are leftist papers. If I want to reads balanced news or news with a conservative viewpoint, I must either watch Fox News on TV, or get on the internet and look go to a conservative news site to get it. And that is exactly what those who used to be readers and subscribers of these papers are doing. But the owners and editors of those papers have their heads so far up the leftist agenda they are tone deaf to the oh, so obvious, reason for this vast migration away from their publications!

It is a sad commentary on the mainstream media in the US when Americans find it necessary to use the Internet to go off-shore to find a source of news that will inform us as to what is REALLY happening in our country, and in, what I laughingly refer to as, “our government.” But millions of Americans are doing just that. I am among them.

It is almost a ritual, at my house, to read the paper over morning coffee or breakfast. But, hey, we can do without it. By the time my carrier gets the daily paper to me these days, I have already read the news on the Internet. Such is the era in which we live.

There is already far too much government interference and just plain meddling in the affairs of business in this country. That is the nature of a socialist government such as we have in America today. Call it what you will, journalism protection, bail-outs for newspapers, it still means the government is curling its fingers around the throats of those who own those news organizations and soon they will begin to squeeze. Taking government money means you do as government says.

Those in the Obama Regime who believe that a government should never allow a crisis to go to waste are busy taking advantage of the current financial crisis in America, and around the world, to shove their socialist agenda down the throats of businesses forcing them to accept government control in exchange for a few more months, or years, of existence.

In my opinion those are Faustian deals… selling one’s soul to the devil in exchange for favors from the devil — even if those favors are just crumbs from his table. Some make the Faustian deals because they believe in the devil’s agenda. Thus it has always been throughout man’s history on this planet.

Look, newspapers are the modern day dinosaurs of the news media. Eventually they will go the way of the dinosaurs. They will become extinct. It is not advisable to interfere with the natural cycle of progress, even in business — one could say — ESPECIALLY in business. As the newspapers die off they will make room for whatever is to take their place.

Having no newspaper to peruse over breakfast is much more acceptable than having a newspaper of which the government is the editor. I shudder to even think of it.

Any government bailout of the press, in any form, simply means no more free press.

A government, which controls the flow of information to its citizens, will have ultimate power over those citizens. Under the Obama Regime, America is heading in that direction as directly as a Martin flies to its gourd.

J. D. Longstreet

J. D. Longstreet blogs daily at INSIGHT on Freedom at: http://www.csadispatch.blogspot.com/

 

WesternFront America

The Mainstream Media (MsM) in America, especially, has gone all out to support Obama and anything Obama does. They have dropped nearly all their pretense of unbiased reporting. Well, most of it, anyway. Some of the old press vets are still clinging to claims of “unbiased reporting”, but they are “aging-out” and will soon be gone from the American scene.

All of this has not gone unnoticed by the consumers of “news” in America and those consumers (of which, I am one) have been, and ARE, upset and disappointed with the MsM’s obvious lack of unbiased reporting. The backlash has already begun.

Look at the financial mess the MSM in America finds itself today. All the financial problems of the MsM cannot be blamed on the Recession, because their collapse began long before the recession set in.

Why do you suppose the implosion of the MsM began at this point in history?

If I had to guess… and had only one chance to get it right, I’d say it was because the MsM decided to openly support Obama during the presidential campaign and continues to openly support him – and his socialist programs – even today while claiming, all the while, that they are unbiased. They are like the kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar. Understand – there are some Americans extremely ticked-off at the Mainstream Media today. In my opinion, there is something akin to an unannounced boycott of the MsM in progress in America today.

See, the MsM is pro-Obama, anti-war, anti-military. The American public interprets that as anti-American behavior. And they don’t like it – at all!

The Mainstream Media in the US is largely controlled by the political Left, and as such, is bound to play down any successes the US has in the any theatre of war – no matter the reasons America had/has for going to war.

Much, if not most, of the MsM have never worn the uniform of any of the branches of America’s armed forces. They haven’t the foggiest idea what war is all about, and certainly not how to wage a war. But, they are experts at telling the world what is wrong with America’s war effort and how badly America is losing and what a “quagmire” the US military has gotten itself into while they would not know a “military quagmire” if it bit them on the butt! Besides, a quagmire to them is defined by the US Military’s inability to invade, conquer, and withdraw in three weeks, tops!

Now, don’t misunderstand. The US is quite capable of beginning and winning a war in three weeks. However, we would have to tap our reserves of those dread “weapons of mass destruction” in order to do it, and frankly that gets a little messy. Plus, the MSM would have apoplexy if we even used a simple little battlefield nuke! Their constant carping and complaining will eventually begin to affect the morale of the troops.

Freedom of the press is a privilege, and most importantly, it is a constitutional right, in America. But with that freedom comes responsibility. It certainly seems the MSM has no concept of their responsibility to America. It is enough that America has granted them the “right” of “freedom of the press”. They willingly use that right irresponsibly, and, in doing so, they assume the predictability of a loose cannon.

I have spoken to servicemen, just returned from a tour of duty in Iraq, and they told me they have access to network and cable news in Iraq. They told me they couldn’t believe the reports they saw on the television news. One soldier said to me, it was as if they (American troops) were fighting one war and the press was reporting on another war… somewhere, other than in Iraq.

Abuses such as these are going to cost the MSM in the long run. Unfortunately, it can only lead to a loss of the freedoms they say they value so much, but abuse so willingly. Sooner, or later, the country will grow tired of their continuous efforts at denigrating this wonderful country and their first amendment rights will be curtailed. That will be a sad day for freedom, but a day the MsM will have brought upon itself.

It is a shame to see a great institution collapse inwards, upon itself, as the MSM is doing. But, there is bound to be a reckoning, and not that far in the future.

There are many more sources of news available to the public now than ever before in history. No longer are consumers of news tied to a newspaper, or a certain TV network, or a cable network. With a click of the “mouse” the world’s news media is at your disposal. Many, like myself, are availing themselves of it.

We get our news, often unfiltered through the lenses of the MSM, and we are better informed for it.

The MSM has only just begun to get their “comeuppance.” Sadly, they brought it upon themselves.

© J. D. Longstreet

 

WesternFront America