Also metmike,this study can enlighten a person as to the myriad methods of polling.

Showing that polls can be designed to produce a desired result should open many minds.A biased poll is propaganda essentially.

Salesmen and snake oil peddlers!

Thanks,I have only skimmed this.

 John

Thanks John,

I hammer MSM sources like CNN, CNBC and others on a semi regular basis for their blatant bias, while using specific examples as evidence and the reasoning. 

This was a recent example:

                NYT prints a blatant political hit piece on Kavanaugh             

                                         Started by metmike - Sept. 17, 2019, 12:21 a.m.            

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/39143/

I was actually part of the MSM for 11 years(1982-1993) but in the non political role of chief meteorologist at a local CBS affiliate-WEHT tv(which is now ABC here in Evansville IN).

I was extremely liberal myself, especially early in that period but have some unique in house stories that are very telling.

1. Elections were often like the Super Bowl to the news department. They really got revved up for it and the 2 main anchors had some favorite local democrats they rooted for.  When the red camera lights were off, they cheered openly for some of the democrats. There was an extraordinarily close race, in fact historical between 2 guys. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_McCloskey

They just loved the democrat and had him at our station several times and had a personal relationship outside of that with him. I actually liked this guy too. I imagine they must have had the republican on too but don't remember it, other than that they greatly disliked him.........I disliked him too. 

2. We had 4 news directors while I was there. The last one, has been the republican mayor of Evansville for a decade. So there are republicans/conservatives  in that business too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lloyd_Winnecke

3. The 2nd news director was a liberal in charge during the Reagan years. When Reagan would give speeches, I remember more than once him saying "How can you not like this guy" in amazement that somebody from the opposing party had so much charisma that even he couldn't dislike the guy. I can just imagine what his comment would be about Trump. How can you not hate this Guy?

4. This last story is the most profound. The 3rd news director that we had was hands down the best one.  He was also one of the best human beings I've ever known too. After around 4 years of being in charge, he resigned. Just before he did that, he called everybody under him together for a meeting to announce it. Probably close to 20 people. We were stunned. He told us that he got into the business(started as a reporter, sometimes investigative reporter) because he thought he could make a positive difference in the world but since he took over the position, he was told that his job was to make money for the owner, Jim Gilmore...........ratings, ratings, ratings. 

He and his wife Bev(who made a 6 figure salary with Bristol Myers) quit their jobs and went to a previously communist country (after the wall came down)to teach them capitalism because they thought it was making a positive difference in the world. 

So this says a couple of things. It tells us something about many in this business. They are not in it to just report the news. Objectively reporting the news in a fair and balanced way is not making much of a difference in most cases. However, when a reporter or anchor observes what they judge as an injustice or situation that violates their belief system..............this is when they have an opportunity to make the world a better place by telling the news with the spin its needs to be told with  in order to fulfill their objective of why they got into the business. 

In this report, group #1 is progressive activists. They are the most assertive of the groups and they also dominate the MSM because that field provides them with the power/opportunities  to deliver the altruistic messages that THEY FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT based on how THEY define their belief system.......which they have deemed to be superior to others belief system.

This is what's happening on CNN, CNBC, the NYT and other media sources.

No doubt that they are very sincere but are also very biased, which is a bad thing when you have the enormous power they have. In today's extreme world, its allowing them to abuse professional journalism ethics/standards because freedom of the press gives them  an almost unlimted ability to state the news how they want people to see it. 

We are seeing this in extreme fashion with anything that has to do with President Trump. They want him out at any cost because his belief system and views don't' line up with theirs in many realms. 

metmike,

 Surely others here feel the same,but I certainly find interest and value in your posts.

The technical/scientific topics,personal stories and human interest subjects-all good.

 Hey everyone,look at the Trading vs NTR totals.

Folks relish good dialog.

Thanks much John!

Maybe I should point out some powerful items in the study. Most are well known but this sort of quantifies it with scientific evidence. 

I have only copied the areas of divisiveness below because they are so striking. 

Progressive Activists represent 8% of the total and Devoted Conservatives represent 6% of the total. As mentioned previously, the MSM is massively over weighted with Progressive Activists/Liberals giving us their interpretation of the news. 

*Fully 95 percent of Progressive Activists believe that American citizens’ rights are prioritized, just 1% think that immigrants get prioritized, while 92 percent of Devoted Conservatives believe the opposite to be true.

*4% of Progressive Activists believe that womens rights are more protected, 73% of devoted Conservatives believe that.

*Many people now a days don't take racism serious enough-Progressive Activists agree to the tune of 92%..........Devoted Conservatives only 6%!

Is it any wonder that the race card is inserted into so many topics by the Progressive Activists?

*People that work hard can find success in life, no matter the situation they were born into. Just 5% of the Progressive Activists believe that, while 92% of Devoted Conservatives do.

*Religion is not important for 76% of the Progressive Activists, but IS important for 86% of the Devoted Conservatives.

*Professional Athletes should be able to kneel as a sign of protest. 99% for Progressive Activists, 5% for Devoted Conservatives.

I may keep this one around for awhile since it explains how the political activist dominated MSM has taken over the narratives in news stories based on their interpretation, using their belief system......which this report clearly identifies.

Progressive activists represent just 8% of the population but they may represent over 50% of the MSM. This allows them to impose their belief system, using freedom of the press on viewers/readers.

FOX news is the exact same thing. Obviously not everyone in journalism is on the left even though journalism appeals to more progressive activists as a field for them to express themselves.

If you go into politics, we have a 2 party system with a place for each party, each having an equal chance to get control of their district, state or country based on elections.

At tv stations and newspapers the same checks and balances (based on legalities of the Constitution) don’t apply. They are not representing the voice of America but instead they represent the belief systems of those that dominate that profession.......progressive activists.

Incredibly, only 6% of scientists are Republicans and 50% of scientists lean towards or are progressive activists. This is the biggest reason for why and how climate science was hijacked for the political agenda.

I’ll Copy that proof.....shown before hear....from my computer later today.

Sorry for the delay.........here's the proof again of the climate science hijacking:

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/39960/

metmike,

 The first paragraph in your post appears to be a self description by the authors of "More In Common".

From their description of the contributors I sense the group is well populated by the liberal or at least the opened minded.

My point being is this does not appear to be a conservative or liberal biased rag.

I stress again that I have just skimmed this work but was wondering if the above is fair to say.

Closer to true/fair/proper research than so much of the fodder being presented?

John

John,

You make a good point. Really good point. They provided the OBJECTIVE data without the opinion that I disagreed with them on, which has morphed into the main talking point of this thread.

I’ll correct that with an edit.....thanks very much!

Thanks to John, I went back and reread some stuff and remembered what actually drew me to this report and group  and recommended it from the get go...........here it is:

Foreword:

This report is about polarization in America today:

From them: What is driving us apart, and what can bring us back together.Political polls and years of knife-edge elections have convinced many that our country has become a 50:50 society, divided into two opposing political tribes and trapped in a spiral of conflict and division. Our research uncovered a different story, one that probes underneath the issues that polarize Americans, and finds seven groups that are defined by their core beliefs, rather than by their political opinions, race, class or gender. In talking to everyday Americans, we have found a large segment of the population whose voices are rarely heard above the shouts of the partisan tribes. These are people who believe that Americans have more in common than that which divides them. While they differ on important issues, they feel exhausted by the division in the United States. They believe that compromise is necessary in politics, as in other parts of life, and want to see the country come together and solve its problems.In the era of social media and partisan news outlets, America’s differences have become dangerously tribal, fueled by a culture of outrage and taking offense. For the combatants, the other side can no longer be tolerated, and no price is too high to defeat them.These tensions are poisoning personal relationships, consuming our politics and putting our democracy in peril. Once a country has become tribalized, debates about contested issues from immigration and trade to economic management, climate change and national security, become shaped by larger tribal identities. Policy debate gives way to tribal conflicts. Polarization and tribalism are self-reinforcing and will likely continue to accelerate. The work of rebuilding our fragmented society needs to start now. It extends from re-connecting people across the lines of division in local communities all the way to building a renewed sense of national identity: a bigger story of us.Our polarization is not simple, but nor is it insoluble. We need to understand it, so we can fix it. More in Common hopes that this report can help inform and inspire this urgent work."

metmike: With this in mind, I should make it clear that my assessment of the MSM controlling the news narratives is also in alignment with their assessment "in the era of social media and partisan news outlets, America’s differences have become dangerously tribal, fueled by a culture of outrage and taking offense."

 My discussion takes us into the realm of explaining how/why the MSM is so partisan based on experiences and observations..something  they don't discuss.

In my heart, I share their hope for healing the growing divide, knowing that Americans are mostly good people, with good intentions that want the best even if good people on both sides think "the best" is completely opposite of what the other side thinks.

However, here is THE problem. As a scientist and realist, ascertaining THE best on challenging, complicated issues requires having AUTHENTIC information and THE OBJECTIVE  truths.  

When our main sources for obtaining this key information, are instead, giving us propaganda (convincing us of a climate crisis during the current climate optimum for instance) in order to manipulate our minds to their way of thinking, then it will always be IMPOSSIBLE for the millions who believe the propoganda(from either side) to come together with those that know the truth.

On some to  many  of these political issues the truth is somewhere in between and compromise is possible . In some realms, however like climate science,  the facts and science are the facts and science. 1+1 will never equal 5. 

When we have the MSM selling us  convincing sounding 1+1=5 snake oil that is being embraced by many, the ones that know that 1-1=2 will never compromise to 1+1=4 or 1+1=3 because they know the product is 2.

THE problem would be solved in a flash if the MSM became honest or if their massive progressive activist population was replaced with those that represent the vast majority that exists in American society representing the middle. 

But the complete opposite is happening. MORE progressive activists are being drawn to this field because they see the increasing power that it has. Freedom of the press laws allow them to act in this manner, with only the most blatant, egregious violations under unique circumstances holding them accountable for pushing propaganda. 

The solution?

They will continue on unfortunately. On issues like climate science, where 1=1=5 is easy to prove as bogus with data showing 1=1=2, at least an atmospheric scientist with the data can show it to whoever hasn't had their minds completely captured. https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/27864/

That is a worthwhile note/clarification.

John,

Thank you so much for taking the time to participate in this discussion and to help me with my own thoughts related to it. 

Sadly, MarketForum is slowly turning into a blog site from the moderator vs a forum that just oversees others communicating. This has happened for several reasons.

1. 65% of the posts up to 9 months ago were hateful, Trump bashing trolling with unreliable sources, used inappropriate language and attacked others. When I tried to get the 3 main source to change,  with assistance and tolerance from me, they instead, justified their behavior(called me a liar) and 2 of them still send me numerous hateful emails months later(which tells me, if I let them back on, exactly what their messages  would be).  I won't be the moderator of a forum that represents everything that I'm against in my personal life. 

2. Most of our discussions in the past featured hotly contested, divisive political disagreements that our 3 banned posters were often at the center of(started an offending thread over).  I warned the other side(the right-Tim-mcfarm-silverspiker for instance) when they stepped out of bounds and without exception, every time they responded humbly and apologized with nothing but great posts that followed, The 3 that were banned insisted that they were right and a moderator shouldn't be posting his views..refusing to follow easy to follow rules.

3. The ones that were willing to follow the, objective, non partisan rules were then mostly from the right. They outnumbered the remaining ones from the left, mainly our best poster and good friend Carl............who always made great points which I almost always agreed strongly with. He used facts and logic and is one of the smartest people I've known. But he was out numbered and regardless of the great relationship that we had sharing many non political positives here, when politics came up, he got out numbered and battered by those that disagreed with his position. Those that had previously been on his side during the heated debates.........but couldn't communicate like civil human beings, were in the penalty box(permanently now because of their attacking me and the forum relentlessly by email)

4. My efforts to stimulate interests with posts on other items, some,many positive messages is probably perceived more of just that...........messages intended to be read and not be the centerpiece of discussions.

With that in mind, please know that this is still a forum which would flourish best with others contributing thoughts. Starting new threads, commenting on threads and participating is greatly encouraged.  I don't want it to be a metmike blog site only, although I would have resigned a long time ago if I didn't think  it is providing me with opportunities to make many positive contributions to communicate the truth on issues like climate change that are lacking in our world today. 

Suggestions and comments would be greatly appreciated. 

I'll probably take this message and use it to start a new thread.

John,

Thanks for helping me this time and so much in the past.

                DOJ Investigation            

                Started by wglassfo - Oct. 27, 2019, 12:24 a.m.            

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/41826/

metmike: That's why we have investigations.............including into the saints of the DOJ, who shouldn't get a free pass just because they were investigating a hated person from the wrong party.

Freedom of the press allows the MSM to blatantly abuse ethical and professional objectivity and fairness standards(half of them are progressive activists) but we must hold the DOJ and intelligence agencies to a much higher standard. 

This is not a position that Flynn is right or wrong. We just can't have the DOJ unanswerable to anybody  for anything......like it has been for any longer. This kind of power allows corruption to fester because people at the top, know they will not be held accountable for unfairly, subjectively imposing justice upon those that their subjective cognitive bias compels them to go after...............and not applying justice to those that they favor. 

It's psychology 101 and these are human beings. They HAVE bias and almost by definition, you don't see your own bias but easily recognize it in others that have the opposite bias as you do:

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/publications/observer/obsonline/bias-is-blind-partisan-prejudice-across-the-political-spectrum.html

"This pattern of bias was consistent across different study types (e.g., whether evaluating science information or policy ideas) and across political topics. The researchers observe that bias may be the very reason that we tend to view political bias as asymmetrical: “We may simply recognize bias in others better than we see it in ourselves,” they conclude."