Fidel Castro has been a thorn in the side of the United States for nearly 5-decades, one of our nearest neighbors, a communist country. Many citizens of Cuba, have fled to freedom to find sanctuary in the United States, and who could blame them? Fidel Castro took over the Cuban government in a revolution and he promised to give the country back to the people, but when the dust had settled, Fidel Castro, gave the country to himself.
This should come as no surprise and certainly this is not the first time in history it has happened. Unfortunately, his rule lasted 50-years, people had been born, lived their natural lives under Fidel Castro, and never knew true freedom, even though it was only 80 miles away. Some took that fateful journey and fled to the US. Most of those Cuban-Americans would certainly like to see Cuba turned into a Democracy.
We need a free Cuba, and those in Cuba deserve to control their own destinies and enjoy liberty and freedom, just like any country. The US should move now to give Cuba back to the people, then open up free-trade, tourism and create win-win partnerships. All this could take place in a very short amount of time with the right will power and leadership with the strength of character to make it so.
Imagine what we could do for Cuba right now. So close, so simple and such a wonderful gift, that we could bring to give that nation back to those who long to be free, desire liberty and deserve a better quality of life; folks the time is now, its time to put Fidel Castro into the history books and continue our mission for the betterment of humankind. Think on this for a moment please, we owe it to our neighbors who have waited oh so long.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Is It Media Bias Or Urban Legend
Have you ever wondered who ultimately has control of the media? This is a subject of concern to many. The question really isn't so much about the ownership of a news organization as it is about the prevailing belief system of those who gather and report the news.
The primary impetus in journalism is to seek to answer a few key questions, for example questions like who, what when, where, why and how. This should satisfy the primary objective of journalism, however many assert this is only a starting point with a fixed agenda at the other end of the report.
In this debate the one thing both sides seem to be able to agree on is that the other side does not present news fairly.
Many contend that the bias of most media is liberal in worldview. This is attributed to radio, television and newsprint. The feeling is that news organizations most often side with liberal issues and will provide more news time to these issues than those who espouse a more conservative point of view. Some have even attempted to chronicle the instances of a liberal bias in the news and those reports seem to indicate that there may be either a liberal bias or at the very least a tendency to keep the conflicting points of view out of balance.
The lost of offenses seem long and unrelenting, but this issue is not one sided. If it were there would be no debate.
There are those who contend there are similar offenses on networks that purport to provide coverage that is more fairly balanced. In these cases those who espouse a more liberal worldview believe that the news coverage on these networks are tantamount to propaganda and misinformation. It is further suggested that these news organizations are the lapdog of the conservative right. As with our previous example there are those that will point out instances where coverage had a decidedly conservative bias with little coverage of any opposing point of view.
A growing contingent of online new distributors has taken the idea of news gathering and information sharing to a place of personal interest. Many individuals and smaller companies are providing news coverage online because they do not trust some of the better-known news gathering organizations. However, it could be argued that even these smaller organizations have a bias that is showing through.
I'd like to contend that there is always going to be a strong tendency to bias in news gathering and reporting. It is possible that a more liberal leaning newscaster will accentuate negative information about a conservative issue while the same would be true about a conservative reporter pointing out flaws in a story about a liberal issue.
It is the contention of some that this may not even be an issue of ill intent. The negative jabs at the opposing perspective may come from an unconscious bias that is not consciously recognized by the writer or reporter. However, this scenario is often recognized quickly by those who have a different perspective on the issue.
Is there a bias in media reporting? If so does that bias lean on one direction more than another? If so, who is responsible?
Discuss all of life's most Controversial Issues at ControversialForums. Have Debates in our Debate Forums.
The primary impetus in journalism is to seek to answer a few key questions, for example questions like who, what when, where, why and how. This should satisfy the primary objective of journalism, however many assert this is only a starting point with a fixed agenda at the other end of the report.
In this debate the one thing both sides seem to be able to agree on is that the other side does not present news fairly.
Many contend that the bias of most media is liberal in worldview. This is attributed to radio, television and newsprint. The feeling is that news organizations most often side with liberal issues and will provide more news time to these issues than those who espouse a more conservative point of view. Some have even attempted to chronicle the instances of a liberal bias in the news and those reports seem to indicate that there may be either a liberal bias or at the very least a tendency to keep the conflicting points of view out of balance.
The lost of offenses seem long and unrelenting, but this issue is not one sided. If it were there would be no debate.
There are those who contend there are similar offenses on networks that purport to provide coverage that is more fairly balanced. In these cases those who espouse a more liberal worldview believe that the news coverage on these networks are tantamount to propaganda and misinformation. It is further suggested that these news organizations are the lapdog of the conservative right. As with our previous example there are those that will point out instances where coverage had a decidedly conservative bias with little coverage of any opposing point of view.
A growing contingent of online new distributors has taken the idea of news gathering and information sharing to a place of personal interest. Many individuals and smaller companies are providing news coverage online because they do not trust some of the better-known news gathering organizations. However, it could be argued that even these smaller organizations have a bias that is showing through.
I'd like to contend that there is always going to be a strong tendency to bias in news gathering and reporting. It is possible that a more liberal leaning newscaster will accentuate negative information about a conservative issue while the same would be true about a conservative reporter pointing out flaws in a story about a liberal issue.
It is the contention of some that this may not even be an issue of ill intent. The negative jabs at the opposing perspective may come from an unconscious bias that is not consciously recognized by the writer or reporter. However, this scenario is often recognized quickly by those who have a different perspective on the issue.
Is there a bias in media reporting? If so does that bias lean on one direction more than another? If so, who is responsible?
Discuss all of life's most Controversial Issues at ControversialForums. Have Debates in our Debate Forums.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)