2008 (136)
2009 (126)
2010 (60)
2011 (105)
2012 (93)
2013 (69)
2014 (68)
图片:看奥巴马的得意劲儿
美国“主流媒体”用5大方法帮助奥巴马赢得了连任。奥巴马应该对美国数位著名记者论功行赏。
美国媒体11月7日发表评论称,媒体精英使公共关系天平倾向于自由派奥巴马、不利于保守派挑战者罗姆尼(Mitt Romney)。他们倾向于奥巴马的报道对于他的胜选起了决定性的贡献。
以下为主流媒体使胜利天平偏向奥巴马的五种方法:
1、媒体小题大作,炒作罗姆尼失言风波。
媒体非常不公正地抓住罗姆尼的失误或者捏造争议,把它们夸大成持续数日的媒体“地震。”以罗姆尼七月份访问欧洲和以色列为例。对21条美国广播公司、哥伦比亚广播公司、全国广播公司夜间新闻有关罗姆尼海外之行的报道分析发现,几乎所有报道(18条,或86%)都强调了罗姆尼的“外交失误”、“失言”、“举止不当”。保守派专栏作家查尔斯-克劳萨默8月2日就这方面的新闻报道进行了严厉的批评,称罗姆尼的海外之行取得了重要成功,但媒体却强调那些不值一提的小事。与此相类似的,当左翼琼斯母亲杂志9月份披露一份秘密录制的有关罗姆尼称47%的美国人不支付收入税的谈话时,电视网络对录音带的处理方式就像是一个轰动性的性丑闻。电视台的早间和晚间节目在三天内播出有关录音带的42篇报道。
在总统6月8日在新闻发布会上称私营行业情况不错后,美国广播公司、哥伦比亚广播公司、全国广播公司只对其进行了一个晚上的报道,随后就不再报道。
2、用具有偏袒性的核查事实抨击罗姆尼
自封的媒体事实核查者在共和党人所发表的说法是准确的情况下攻击共和党人是说谎者。例如,《密尔沃基哨兵报》记者称,罗姆尼竞选伙伴瑞安在党代表大会讲演有关通用汽车关闭其家乡工厂的事情“不实”,但事实上瑞安在细节方面是完全正确的,这种偏袒性的评估成了电视记者热议的内容。
同样的事情发生在罗姆尼在最后一场总统辩论中所谈到的奥巴马“道歉之旅”。尽管奥巴马2009年事实上批评美国“傲慢”、“嘲弄”,经常把原则放在一边,但电视台称奥巴马的海外之行是道歉之旅“不实”,因为即便奥巴马批评了美国过去的外交政策,他事实上也没有发布任何道歉。
在“真相警察”主要审查共和党候选人的言论,媒体使用“事实核查”作为使竞争有利于民主党人的又一大棒。
3、偏袒辩论主持人
对奥巴马首场辩论感到不满的自由派人士批评公共广播公司的莱勒(Jim Lehrer)在首场辩论会上的自由主持风格,MSNBC分析人士法恩曼(Howard Fineman)批评他“毫无用处”,没有代表奥巴马总统一方进行辩论。
这样的批评意见可能鼓动了美国广播公司主持人若达茨(Martha Raddatz)10月11日副总统辩论、美国有线电视新闻网主持人克劳利(Candy Crowley)第二场总统辩论的主持风格,两位记者多次打断共和党候选人,使辩论的内容大部分是自由派议题。克劳利在有关奥巴马称他在美国驻班加西领事馆遇袭后的第二天就将这一事件定性为恐怖袭击事件的说法上为总统说话,她对罗姆尼说:“他确实是那样作了,先生,称这是一起恐怖行为。” ---- 但是,事实是奥巴马用了那个词汇,却不是针对那个事件。主持人公然指鹿为马,她因此成为许多自由派媒体的女英雄。
4、封杀有关美国驻班加西领事馆遇袭事件
在9月11日美国驻班加西领事馆遇袭事件发生后,各大电视网络声称,这些事件将有助于巩固奥巴马的地位,提醒选民他作为总司令的权力。但一系列泄露的信息使奥巴马作为英雄指挥官的形象被打破后,各大电视网络将班加西的报道放在非要闻处。
各大电视网络不但没有将班加西领事馆遇袭事件作为“十月意外事件”报道,反而进行了“十月压制”,封杀班加西的报道一直至选举日。
5、掩盖糟糕的经济
学者们都认为奥巴马的弱点在于美国经济未能恢复,他在此之前进行了昂贵的经济刺激措施,四年增加了1万亿美元赤字。但是各大电视网络未能积极地、持续地报道经济议题,而在1992年和2004年共和党总统在位时曾大量报道经济情况。
当共和党总统面临连任时,电视台记者肯定要强调经济“受害者”:无家可归男子、没有医疗保险的女性、失业工人、不得不在药物和食物之间作出选择的老年人。但在今年的经济情况和大萧条一样严重时,这些同情的声音从电视台消失了。
考虑到奥巴马的记录,罗姆尼竞选阵营已克服了许多的媒体倾向性,他们几乎就要取得胜利,但这五大趋势使媒体的历史性偏向性在今年达到了新层次,在这过程中保住了奥巴马的总统职务。
==========================================================================3. 奥巴马是被犹太人选中的“傀儡”。
2004年大选,民主党全国代表大会,奥巴马作为非洲裔代表,被邀请在大会上演讲。他确实有演讲天分和煽动性。他当时的口号是:not white america, not black america, but United State of America,俨然一副统和各族裔的架势。可惜的是,他当总统的四年,族裔割裂进一步加大,他在白人选民的得票率低于40%,仅依靠非洲裔和拉丁裔的支持而当选。他在全美国选票中,仅获得50%的选票。
2004年的演讲,使的奥巴马在民主党阵营得到赞扬。他在2006年竞选美国参议员,获胜后记者问他是否参选2008年总统。奥巴马斩钉截铁的说,不会。因为他没有经验,需要当六年的参议员,积累经验,到2012年以后才可能参选。
但是,一个没有经验,而演说具有煽动性的奥巴马,才是比较容易控制的人选。于是某些犹太人的势力,开始围在奥巴马周围,鼓动他参加2008年的竞选。犹太人动用了各方面的力量,经济金融界,媒体娱乐界,还有各种智库,一起帮助奥巴马竞选,最终击败了喜莱莉和麦肯。也是美国历史上第一次在白人主流选民中,未获多数支持,凭借少数族裔的选票当选总统的人。
他的竞选团队与首席政治顾问,都是犹太人把持。当选之后任命的第一个官员,也是总统身边最重要的白宫大管家,也是犹太人。这位白宫办公厅主任,没有为美国服务过,但是却为以色列军队志愿服务两年。可见,在主流犹太人的心里,以色列的重要性比美国大得多。
奥巴马成为总统前,从未当过任何单位/公司/组织的领导,从未负责过为任何人设定工资,或负责任何单位/公司/组织的预算,当然他也从未当过一天的军人。就是这样的一个“白纸”资历,一下子成为全球最强大的国家军队统帅,最大经济体的CEO,一下子担当起全球最高的国家预算,当然也是全球最大的国家债务,如果抛开政党观点,这简直就是玩笑,儿戏。但是,正是这样的毫无经验的总统,才容易被操纵,成为木偶,傀儡。
这些不是耸人听闻,而是事实。大家可以在维基或google找到。
但是,犹太人把持的主流媒体,是不会告诉你这些的。你需要自己去研究,分析。
参考:
明天太阳照样升起,只是美国在向欧洲或墨西哥靠拢
物以类聚人以群分,总统大选华人应该站在哪一边?
没搞明白,看你这个讲法,我的理解应该是民主党更保守更有信念,共和党更自由。可为啥却说“媒体与比较有坚定信念的共和党比较对立,而民主党比较没有信念,或者信念不够坚强而多变,有奶便是娘,比较符合媒体的口味。”?
You know, the facts have a liberal bias. So, go ahead and blame the media!
Shocking how dumb that guy(觅葆难) is. He makes Joe Biden seem like a Rhodes Scholar.
Obama = Lies, Divisiveness and Recession.
Remember the promise President Obama made just after his inauguration in 2009? “Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.”........Instead, Americans have suffered through lies, stonewalling, cover-ups, corruption, secrecy, scandal and blatant disregard for the rule of law…this has been the Obama legacy for the last four years....
我们“冒犯”了又一个The LOWER IQ's Demographic.
( 有的民主党人 dont even know the difference between "Income Tax" and "Capital Gains tax".)
同样的笨蛋:)你以为穷人看电视就不算收视率了?收视率还要看每个阶层各有多少?你以为高收入的就多看电视啦?你以为穷人穷了就少看电视啦?事实往往刚刚相反啊!
12:45pm, the attack started (our time) Washington officials watched it happen in real time video. By no later than 5pm, We know the president was informed and that Obama went to bed.
Our officials knew for 4-hours, and did nothing, nada, to Help. We had 3 air bases within reach and an aircraft carrier. Someone made a decision to say "NO" - It wasn't a low life Walter Mitty, Who was it" ... Don't know .... President its said was is BED. We know on the 12th of September, he informed the nation and "Flew Off To Vegas" - Then on to a tour of TV talk shows yucking in up. So ..? Maybe .... He was in bed
Stevens died at 8pm (our time), plenty of time for help, support to have reached our embassy, 6-hours in 2 more had died, 8-hours in another had died
We watched a large well armed, organized militia (carrying the flag of al-Qaeda),engage our embassy personnel for 7-hours, and ... we did nothing ....We watched our embassy personnel die in "real time" and no help was sent.
Commander in Chief, Barack Obama, the buck stops with you! You LIED! - 4 Good Americans Died! Then Obama tried to sell the world a cartoon caused this mess. 35 attacks on the US, 4 dead, and Obama's words, it wasn't optimal?!
Obama froze, a president can never freeze!
如果你去教会,就听到不同的声音了。
哪个偏袒哪一边,先听听看再评论。
http://www.kqed.org/news/story/2012/10/17/109625/october_surmise_predicting_the_next_president?source=npr&category=politics
如果一个共和党人发神经病,他买药吃。
民主党人则会想:要争取神经病的合法权益,不可以歧视神经病,还要鼓励发展神经病。
民主党人呼吁把他讨厌的电视节目都关掉。"
Really? Who is complaining about the media here? Why don't you just go watch FoxNews?
It's TOO BAD Obama didn't respond BIG and FURIOUS in Benghazi.
Ex-Navy Seals Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods held off an entire platoon of terrorists for 7 hours at the Benghazi Consulate. They voluntarily tried to save Ambassador Chris Stevens and his Aide Sean Smith.
The White House and State Department watched them die from the situation room in the White House. Obama had Marines one hour away. He had two aircraft bases within an hour of Benghazi. There were C-130 Gun Ships ready to go. BUT OBAMA DID NOTHING.
Are you that dumb? Your liberal media now is your party wing. We want a media which report the truth and real news and let people make their own call.
Election has consequences. I say let it burn, people are not going to wake up until it hits the rock bottom. If that's the way it has to be, so be it. My family and I will be prepared. So should you my like-minded friends.
Benjamin Franklin once said, "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters." I don't need government as my master.
who is John Galt.
When GOP say we don't want tax payers' money to fund free contraception. Liberal say oh see how evil those republicans are anti-women. They want to ban contraception.
When two stupid local GOP candidates said something about abortion. Liberal tell you oh those evil repoblicans want to ban abortion. Even though Romney's stance on abortion is just as same as that of Cliton which is legal,rare and safe.
When GOP say we want to secure our border which I think most countries secure their borders and we don't want to give illegal immigrants anmesty because it's unfair for those legal immigrants who are still waiting for years in line to come to this country, but we are not going to round them up and send them home. Then Liberals say those evil republicans hate latinos and minorities. Really?
如果你不知道自己属于哪一边,这里有个测试!
如果一个共和党人不喜欢持枪,他不买枪。
如果一个民主党人不喜欢持枪,他要求法律禁止所有枪械。
如果一个共和党人是素食主义者,他不吃肉。
如果一个民主党人是素食主义者,他要求所有人都不能吃肉。
如果一个共和党人是同性恋,他安静地好好生活。
如果一个民主党人是同性恋,他要求立法强制别人尊重他。
如果一个共和党人破了产,他考虑如何改进处境。
民主党人则会想:现在轮到谁来照顾我了?
如果一个共和党人讨厌某电视节目,他换台。
民主党人呼吁把他讨厌的电视节目都关掉。
如果一个共和党人不信神,他不去教堂。
不信神的民主党人想让所有关于上帝或宗教的言论都消失。
如果一个共和党人觉得自己需要医保,他去买一个,或者找个包医保的工作。
民主党人则要求不买医保的人为他的医保买单。
如果一个共和党人读了这个,他会到处扩散,让自己的朋友开怀大笑。
民主党人会删掉它,因为他被“冒犯”了。
http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/07/politics/obama-identity/index.html?hpt=us_t2
Of course, MSNBC is a far left network, ABC,NBC,CBS,CNN are all left leaning. Only one fox is a right leaning network. Yet you are telling they have no impact on people's perception on candidates?
Yesterday on MSNBC one of their programe's co-host said this "Now I do what to see Mitt Romney in white house, he can be a secetary of commerce or somthing else, he is definitely a very talented guy." The same person accused Romney of being an evil businessman, a heartless corporate raider,a tax cheater,a racist over and over and over before the election. Tell me how honest they are.
Washington post on Ann Romney and Michelle Obama. When Ann wore a fine blouse in a CBS morning show, the paper criticized her being out of touch wearing a $990.00 blouse in a difficult time for lots of average americans while praisng Michelle Obama two weeks later being stylish and brilliant when she wore a designer shirt which costs $6800.00 in market. Tell me they are not biased considering how much the Ronmeys is worth.
“可是FOX News 还是一如即往的一口咬定ROMNEY 胜,似乎很没有风度”
我觉的风度还是其次,最不利他们自己的是缺乏reality check。无厘头的认为别家的民意测验都是带着偏见的。连经验丰富的Carl Rove都栽了个大跟头。
媒体有他们自己的原则,他们是有职业标准的。这是现实。
两年,四年后,两党还是要借用媒体做竞选。谁的message得人心谁就赢。
责怪媒体并不是取胜的办法。
关于媒体,我只注意到一点,第一次 debate ,奥巴马表现不如人意,各大媒体都有反应,(特别是MSNBC 的Chris Mattews当场差点
气抽了),后两次奥表现好,媒体满意,可是FOX News 还是一如即往的一口咬定ROMNEY 胜,似乎很没有风度。
谢谢你这样有见解的跟贴,也再次证明了网络藏龙卧虎。的确是,美国的保守派政客们,惯常以道德标杆自诩。把勤劳﹑守法﹑诚信当作自己独有的品质。唯其在这个假想的前提下,当他们的面具被揭除,真相被暴露时,才格外的使人觉得尴尬。
One of Obama's legacy will be the deep divisiveness of the country.
-----------------------------
Believe me. Miss Cat, nobody can outdo FOXTV when it comes to divide the country and people.
在政治报道上,美国媒体所喜好的是能够吸引观众读者的人物,亦即英语所谓的 charismatic personality, 无论这人的立场是左是右。其次要轮到新闻的制造者,无论原因为何。 在1950年代,美国媒体的宠儿有一度是共和党当时的副总统尼克松。他不属于有 charisma 的一类人物,但是他也不放弃利用机会替自己制造新闻,例如 1959年7月在莫斯科的美国展览会上与当时的苏联总理赫鲁晓夫作即兴辩论。结果媒体广为报道,增加了尼克松的正面形象。第二年尼克松竞选美国总统,以 0.2%的差距败给民主党的肯尼迪,事后有人归因于肯尼迪的俊朗外表,属于charismatic 一类;而尼克松容貌平庸,在电视辩论时形象分打了折扣。到1962年,尼克松以上次总统候选人的尊荣回到加州竞选州长,自以为胜券在握,结果败给形象不出众但得到多个社会团体支持的民主党候选人 Pat Brown(现任加州州长的父亲)。 尼克松的感想,是媒体辜负了他,他预备告别政界,在新闻发布会上说 “You don't have Nixon to kick around any more,。。。” 言下之意,他认为媒体对他的报道,或过于繁琐,或失之简短,都对他有不公平之处。 此后虽然他在六年后重返政界,而且赢得了 1968年的总统大选,他总是认为媒体有歧视他的倾向。 1972年,他首次访问中国大陆,又成了媒体的焦点所在。那是他一生中得到媒体注意力最多的一段时间。但是好景不长,一年多后水门案暴露,尼克松最终被认定为企图以非法手段掩盖真相,一直到1974年8月辞职下台。这期间尼克松仍然是媒体追逐的对象,只不过从正面人物转化成了负面人物。
在他所写的回忆录中,尼克松没有忘记对媒体加以批评,总之是认定他遭到 Liberal 派媒体的不公待遇。但是从我们旁观者的角度去看尼克松一生的经历,他从来都是美国政界上的保守派,未曾改换过旗帜。从40年代到70年代,几乎30年的政治生涯中,尼克松在媒体的聚光镜下经过许多次的角色转换。时而是宠儿,时而是无情的白脸人物。这些不同的脸谱能够使用在同一个人的身上,与其说是媒体的决定,不如说是尼克松本人的心态产生的投影。媒体有一些市场取向是难免的,和其他行业一样,它必须报道广大市场所希望看到的题材与人物。 但在同一个人身上前后30年,媒体呈现这样多的反复起伏,我们很难不认为,这个人本身也有和媒体至少一样多或者更多的责任。
说起保守派的政客,除了尼克松而外,还有 1981~1989的美国总统里根。里根是电影演员出身,虽然没有成为一流的大明星,但他的演技训练足以迷惑成千上万的美国民众,吸引力超过同时代的其他美国政客。 里根在政治上的表现,不是一个精明能干的执政者,而是一个高级的推销员。他不善于背诵数据记录,但知道如何推搪对方的质问,把论战转移到对自己比较擅长的方面去。他比罗姆尼只能不断说自己有能力要巧妙一些。罗姆尼的自夸功劳,他的自诩精明,最终使人怀疑他说话的实质究竟有多少。里根所表现的平拙反而更能使人信服。有人认为媒体倾向自由派,对保守政客不利,看看里根的表现,就可以知道政见保守与否不是媒体态度的最终决定力量。政客本身是不是前后摇摆修改(如罗姆尼对政府医药保险的态度),是不是对不同团体说不同的话(如罗姆尼私下在特定场合说的 47%美国人靠政府养),都要影响这个人的诚信度。媒体遇到这类事件都会全力报道,无论这人偏向于政治光谱的哪一端。 我们看看80年代的历史,就知道像里根一样的好推销员一旦诚信遭到质疑,也要遭遇退货的待遇。自1985年开始,暴露出来的 Iran-Contra 案件逐渐发展成为一个丑闻,即使说服力好如里根,两年之后也只能认错,口头上承受了所有政治上的责任,虽然法律上的罪罚由属下承当了。里根的遭遇是另外一个例子。它告诉我们,只要政客的诚信出现问题,所有重视信誉的媒体也要划清界限,不能不作批评。
媒体在报道政治新闻时,像剥洋葱一样的披露真相是很重要的一个环节。 美国的保守派政客们,惯常以道德标杆自诩。把勤劳﹑守法﹑诚信当作自己独有的品质。 唯其在这个假想的前提下,当他们的面具被揭除,真相被暴露时,才格外的使人觉得尴尬。
在此道歉,刚才发过一次。上面最后一段漏掉了关键的几个字,让读者不知何意。所以不得不重发一次。
看看美国现在的人口结构和移民趋势就知道美国社会一定会向左转。同时也是美国社会发展趋向开明、平权和进步的表现。所谓progressive也是时代的声音,共和党保守派还想维护18、19世纪的价值观怎么可能。
为什么学校知识分子倾向民主党?同样是这个道理。难道他们都向往苏联向往共产?很可笑。例如德国在一百年前就实现了社会福利,难道德国变成了社会主义,走向了没落?西德人均比美国还高。
太多人太不了解世界,太无知。
你才想当然呢!收视率才不管观众是不是躺沙发上看的呢。
Light pierces darkness and truth trumps lies. If this were not so, Fox News would be ignored by liberals, not feared and fought against. Liberals do not hate Fox because Fox is biased. Liberals hate Fox because Fox reports news that other media sources would like to ignore.
When Barack Obama said, "If you've got a business—you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen.", most major news outlets waited, some up to four days, to report this. Fox reported it the day it happened. One has to wonder if it would have been reported at all without Fox News.
This has always been a bit of a mystery: MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, and often CNN present a left leaning bias on a regular basis. The media in general are pro-Obama and often appear to be a part of his re-election campaign. On the net, Obama has sixty popular sites that do his bidding.
So why does Fox News disturb so many liberals and stimulate such vicious attacks from them?
I believe that the answer is this. Many liberals (especially politicians and those who profit from politicians) do not want a conservative voice allowed anywhere. Many do not want dialogue and they do not want freedom of expression. They want one view and one side given to the public – the liberal view. Liberals fear the general public hearing what conservatives have to say because when people hear unbiased news and reasons why conservatives love capitalism and our constitution, people gain new understanding and often reject the agenda they were taught in government schools. Many will no longer buy into the “take wealth from the rich, give it to the government and Uncle Sam will take care of everyone” argument after hearing statistics and being presented with factual information.
Fox is accused of being the most biased news agency. The truth is that Fox News is the only major news agency that presents both sides. Fox has liberal voices on a regular basis, but there are always conservative voices. That is what sets Fox apart from the others. Fox also reports news that would go unreported in a liberally biased media. This is why Fox is the most popular news agency in the country and this is why it is feared and hated by many.
Imagine America, or any country, where over 1/2 the people have no voice. When Fox is shut down or taken over, that is basically what we will have in the USA. Even if we still have radio programs like Limbaugh, without a news agency to actually get reporters into the field, much information will never get to the people.
Why would freedom loving people want this?
"都当美国人是傻瓜呢.再加上那一车车拿了免费食品拉去投票的选民!", the ones voted for Obama are not "傻瓜", they're prettymama, sorry, typo, it's pretty granny.
你时不时就是想当然。“。。。绝大多数成天躺沙发上的都是需要照顾并且等待救济的,媒体也在争夺他们的市场。”这些拿救济的人是媒体、商家要争夺的群体?啥逻辑!
良知吧。
Does anyone in our media care that the President of the United States blamed another American for what happened in Benghazi....because he didn't want to offend terrorists.
Anyone care? Anyone at all?
犹太人领福利,好。
统制宣传和教育,也是毛获得成功的秘诀之一。
这一问,切中要害。
For example, I did not see it engaged the public in a discussion of Obama's comment of "voting is the best revenge". The media should have compelled him to exlpain who he wanted to revenge against.
One of Obama's legacy will be the deep divisiveness of the country.
不是福利的问题,而是观众的数量问题。象洛杉矶和纽约这些大都市,绝大多数成天躺沙发上的都是需要照顾并且等待救济的,媒体也在争夺他们的市场。