Chuck, have you seen this story on any news other than Fox? The paste is from
Al
Jazeera:

Well, there you go. Fox and Al Jazeera.
That's two, right off the bat. Al Jazeera isn't exactly pro Bush, is it? :-)


No matter one's political leanings, it would seem that withholding news
should
be somewhat upsetting.


John H

Surely you don't believe that every major news source must report everything
that goes on, anywhere in the world, every day?

Even your beloved Fox doesn't do that. There's a big wide world out there that
goes well beyond the latest pro-Bush rally and sunshine reports from "Our
Historic Triumph in Iraq".

On 14 Jul 2004 19:55:02 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Chuck, have you seen this story on any news other than Fox? The paste is from
Al
Jazeera:

Well, there you go. Fox and Al Jazeera.
That's two, right off the bat. Al Jazeera isn't exactly pro Bush, is it? :-)


No matter one's political leanings, it would seem that withholding news
should
be somewhat upsetting.


John H

Surely you don't believe that every major news source must report everything
that goes on, anywhere in the world, every day?

Even your beloved Fox doesn't do that. There's a big wide world out there that
goes well beyond the latest pro-Bush rally and sunshine reports from "Our
Historic Triumph in Iraq".


But this example underscores the rationale behind the selective
sorting of the news and which stories to run. Those services which
lean to the left consistently run stories of soldier deaths, tactical
issues, insurgent uprisings, and any other item which gives the
impression that the occupation of Iraq is not going very well. There
are many positive stories as well, but other than Fox, you'd have to
go to an international news service to see them.

Sort of the same bias which showcases John Kerry's "brave" military
service, but fails to cover the story of the men (both fellow soldiers
and commanders) who served with Kerry, and who feel that he's stabbed
his fellow servicemen in the back, and who's actions immediately after
the war define him as someone who should not be in charge of the
military.

http://swiftboatsbrotherhood.com/

http://www.vetsagainstkerry.org/

Now you might be quick to dismiss this as exaggerated propaganda and
smear, but there is enough of these similar accounts that it surely
deserves a closer look, but not one of the news media outlets are
taking the baton. Yet these same news outlets are STILL beating the
dead horse over Bush's military records. If this is not enough to
convince you that if not outright bias, that a clear double standard
exists, I don't know what will.


Dave