Is CSPAN really biased, or are we just so jaded...?

[Viva_La_Revolution]

Cue Jaded by Aerosmith…

I missed the first guests on WJ this morning, cause I slept in till 5am. I’m watching the rerun now, Mark Rotenberg, from Pres. of the Electronic Privacy Info center.
Rotenberg says Bush broke the law by going around the requirements. (Trivia - NSA nickname in the 70’s; No Such Agency) “ I think it’s a very difficult argument for the president to make right now, the law is very clear.” He repeated this later, almost word for word.
one caller – “Wiretapping? What’s the point? Open borders! I voted for this guy, I’m as much to blame as anyone else. Open borders!” :rofl:


Next on was Rivkin, the GOP tool. Discussion thread here - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x33060
The info on what phone #’s they use on which days is intriguing, and deserves attention.

And the last guest, David Cole, a Real Law Professor, who did a fine job rebutting the rw callers. He also stated, in so many words, that * broke the law.

I find the fact that they prefaced and followed that RW shill with real experts, perhaps says something. Lawyers have known for years that it’s best to have the last word.

I have come to the conclusion that CSPAN is trying to be non-partisan, at least when Lamb is not the host.

Your thoughts?

[NMDemDist2]

1. i get mad at them, but i think they bend over backwards to present

both sides with little commentary

[President Jesus]

2. jaded -nt

[Jayhawk Lib]

8. Agreed. They are jaded....nt

[Toots]

3. I have come to the conclusion that CSPAN is trying to be partisan

Is it possible you meant non-partisan here? Otherwise your point does not make sense...

[Viva_La_Revolution]

7. Yes thank you

refilling coffee cup now (and editing) :eyes:

[blm]

4. They do that on days that get worst ratings. Also, they were recently hit

with a report that showed that 2/3 of their guests represented rightwing and Republican viewpoints. They will likely show an attempt at appearing less biased, at least for the time being.

[jonnyblitz]

9. yup. Fairness In Accuracy and Reporting did the study

that you are referring to:

<snip>
"To test C-SPAN’s claims of fairness, Extra! studied Washington Journal’s guestlist, tabulating all 663 guests that appeared on the show in the six-month period from November 1, 2004 to April 30, 2005. Guests were classified by gender, ethnicity, party affiliation (if any) and occupation. The study also looked at the think tanks most prominently represented on the show.

Despite C-SPAN’s stated goals, Extra!’s study found Washington Journal skewing rightward, favoring Republican and right-of-center interview subjects by considerable margins over Democratic and left-of-center guests. The study also found that women, people of color and public interest viewpoints were substantially underrepresented."
<snip>

for more...
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2764

[tx_dem41]

5. I don't believe that hosts themselves are generally biased.

I think the issue of bias might come into the selection of guests, but I personally believe that is not a bias question but a question of being lazy when selecting guests. When Republicans control all three branches, its too easy to pick a Republican as a guest. Time to get creative and expand the rolodex.

[w8liftinglady]

10. I agree

I truly feel the hosts make a real attempt to be objective,even when answering the histrionic blathering of callers from both sides of the political spectrum.

[Exiled in America]

6. I can't make up my mind.

sometimse c-span really bugs me. Then again, this is the channel that had a three hour interview with Noam Chomsky, so..

[kentuck]

11. Paul Orgel , the host on C-SPAN, is very conscious of our concerns...

...in my opinion. I've noticed that he chooses issues that are more topical and interesting than most of the other hosts. He tries to do a good job. He will have someone from the other side but I think he is on our side.