-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
FAIR: MSNBC’s Anti-Sanders Bias Makes It Forget How to Do Math
- Thread starter brainchild
- Start date
Possibly try wearing ironed clothes every now and again? He just looks so frumpy.
Yeah. From the group that wants to talk about MSNBC fucking with polling numbers due to a very likely bias. You know, what this thread is about?
But instead we're waiting for the anti Sanders squad to wear themselves out after seeing a thread with Sanders in the title.
What do you expect from an incredibly flimsy OP, that can easily be explained by unpaid interns and not some grand conspiracy against Sanders by the media.
How does he expect to win the GE if this is a huge deal?
Do you SEE the shit some other candidates deal with?
I mean, coming into a thread about fudging polling numbers and posting about a 1972 article that was walked back does seem strangely like derailing doncha think?
Curious how virtually all of the people who say things like "these BernieBros are only supporting him because they're racist and sexist" either stayed silent about or outright supported their own party smearing a black Muslim woman in a way that literally helped endanger her life. Really makes you think
How so?
It goes to Sanders making women uncomfortable.
Sorry if it's inconvenient for your narrative.
Now this, on the other hand, is derailing.
That has literally nothing to do with the topic. You derailed the conversation with your own personal narrative and for what? To let us all know you don't like the guy? Ok I guess. There's also the option of not posting anything at all if you don't want to stay on topic.
I did not bring up the other story that has to do with MSNBC.
But even that is relevant to a degree.
Who is backseat modding?
Honestly this is fine too. I find it fascinating that we're so tribalistic now that a decent percentage of posters will completely ignore a very serious issue in our media to shit on a person a bit left of them like he's goddamn Trump himself.
Go off King
Just ignore Suiko. It's better for your mental health
Just ignore them. They're in here to stir shit up and bring nothing to the conversation. Save yourself some mental stress.
Just ignore them. They're in here to stir shit up and bring nothing to the conversation. Save yourself some mental stress.
The OP lays out a consistent pattern of behavior that curiously only seems to effect a single candidate, and you blame it on unpaid interns making mistakes.
Who's the one who needs some perspective?
It's a pattern without evidence of cause.
It becomes a "Very Serious Issue" if, for example, Sinclair Media was directing local stations to fudge Bernie's poll numbers or run hit pieces on certain issues. Oh wait, something like that actually happened, and there was evidence of it.
I mentioned in PoliEra that these polls are nitpicking to download Bernie. And yeah
He's a threat to the rich. Like what does it tell you when the executives from Comcast held a fundraiser for Biden?
He's a threat to the rich. Like what does it tell you when the executives from Comcast held a fundraiser for Biden?
I don't remember the last time I turned on any cable news, now that you mention it.
Maybe the 2016 GE debates?
They don't have the influence your local station does, or nationally, the nightly news from CBS/NBC/ABC.
I'd argue internet media probably has more influence than cable news anymore.
The thing that gets me about this most recent flare up is, who the hell is watching weekend MSNBC? Seriously though who?
I imagine mostly the 45 yo+ demographic
Anecdotally, my mom watches msnbc nightly.
d
What a totally logical take to an article clearly evidencing fraudulent numbers designed to make Bernie look worse. Seriously what the fuck even is the point of this post?
It's called reasoning.
If this were simply interns making mistakes, we would expect to see the effects spread out across multiple candidates. The fact that it seems to disproportionately effect one candidate implies that there is intent.
Ok, I read the article. There are too few examples, and a rebuttal by the campaign comms director doesn't necessarily settle things. But I will say these:
- Sanders is definitely getting less focus this time, as more candidates (and more women) running make the race more exciting than just Sanders vs. one other person. Even if the figures were correct and the list order adherent to descending-number order (like it was just a moment ago while I type this), this is just how it is this time and Sanders has the challenge to be more visible.
-MSNBC frequently has on former Clinton campaign members, true. But they bellyache far more about the general election than about anything from Sanders, they turn out not to be the best panel or spot guests IMO.
- Mistakes happen. Even this article got someone's name wrong. Sometimes a mistake is a mistake even with other stuff going on.
- As for any corporate-level stuff, most of the candidates would make the highest-paid people there "worse off" via taxes or regulations or supporting legislation or healthcare or what have you.
- Plenty of MSNBC guests are attracted politically to other candidates like Buttigieg, but not just at the expense of Sanders. As the race tightens I expect former intel and judicial members to lean further into their preferring men over women.
Candidates get the best coverage when they a) poll the best, b) are very very available to the media, and c) have a broad but ever-shifting range of messages. Crowds don't seem to matter - the media doesn't cover most protests and no longer really covers Trump rallies either. They know the candidates can (and perhaps think they should) come to them. Sanders, to his misfortune or to his credit depending on circumstance, currently doesn't offer any of those three things.
- Sanders is definitely getting less focus this time, as more candidates (and more women) running make the race more exciting than just Sanders vs. one other person. Even if the figures were correct and the list order adherent to descending-number order (like it was just a moment ago while I type this), this is just how it is this time and Sanders has the challenge to be more visible.
-MSNBC frequently has on former Clinton campaign members, true. But they bellyache far more about the general election than about anything from Sanders, they turn out not to be the best panel or spot guests IMO.
- Mistakes happen. Even this article got someone's name wrong. Sometimes a mistake is a mistake even with other stuff going on.
- As for any corporate-level stuff, most of the candidates would make the highest-paid people there "worse off" via taxes or regulations or supporting legislation or healthcare or what have you.
- Plenty of MSNBC guests are attracted politically to other candidates like Buttigieg, but not just at the expense of Sanders. As the race tightens I expect former intel and judicial members to lean further into their preferring men over women.
Candidates get the best coverage when they a) poll the best, b) are very very available to the media, and c) have a broad but ever-shifting range of messages. Crowds don't seem to matter - the media doesn't cover most protests and no longer really covers Trump rallies either. They know the candidates can (and perhaps think they should) come to them. Sanders, to his misfortune or to his credit depending on circumstance, currently doesn't offer any of those three things.
What a surprise, someone makes a thread about a corporation going out of their way to frame things against Bernie Sanders and that oh-so-special part of ERA that everyone loves came in, gaslit everyone that observed basic facts and screencaps, shit up the thread with irrelevant content, and now get snippy when everyone that tried to discuss the actual topic gets pissed.
Seriously. Shame on all these people. It's embarrassing to be a part of this community sometimes.
But Bronx-Man! Why follow the topic when I can blame the left for everything wrong in politics!?!
/s
He could stop sticking and shaking his damn finger in everyone's face for a start. The skin crawl comment is one I normally see. People like to dismiss it instead of looking at why it actually gets said. There is a reason why people land on that and it has a lot to do with how he personally acts and sounds. His mannerisms to a lot of people that aren't supporters produce negative reactions. That's not a current thing. It was an issue and a thing back in 2016 as well. We all know a person at school or work or life in general where you and others around you just don't get a good vibe from and they haven't done anything actually wrong to you but how they act, sound, etc is super off putting to you. Sanders is like that for a LOT of people.
Now MSNBC does fuck up polls like this. They were doing to Harris a few weeks back as well. They completely left her off some fundraising charts when she was #3. It was Biden, Sanders, her, and Mayor Pete in that order and she wasn't included. It was back when outlets were falling in love with Pete based on really nothing and had kicked Beto to curb.
Is the stuff in the OP just supposed to be handwaved away?
Isn't it possible that it's ordered by margin and Sander's is actually less than Warren's, but that's obfuscated by rounding?1. 49 < 48
Result: Sanders goes from second to "fourth" place.
MSNBC made a handy graphic for a poll on July 7 that showed 2020 match-ups against Trump among Democratic voters. The list was in descending order of candidates' polling numbers—except for Bernie Sanders, whose name is placed under Warren's and Harris's, though he polls higher than both of them. (If the list is ordered by the margin between the candidate and Trump, Sanders would be in third place, behind Harris.)
Anyway, yes the media in general has been ignoring Sanders:
That's a graph on how much larger a candidate's share of 15-second clips in cable news is during a week vs. their polling that week. Sanders actually had his strongest showing since April last week.
Handwaved implies they read it, then waved it away. I think they are just plain ignoring and not reading.
Six is a decent number of examples. Too many examples for them all to be mistakes that fault Sanders specifically but I suppose that's subjective. What's not subjective is that they'll let "analysts" like Mimi Rocah say shit like that skin crawling thing and no one on the panel questions her about it. MSNBC giving Sanders less coverage because he doesn't draw their viewers in as much as other candidates is understandable, but their coverage on him clearly trends towards hostility.
This is just the beginning of the lows that Comcast owned MSNBC and many others will sink to in order to ensure Bernie Sanders is not the next president of the US.
Pay attention. They almost all do shit like this to paint pictures that have nothing to do with reality. They will try and choose your president for you. Don't let them.
Things they do is ignore, pick polls/manipulate them so that they agree with what they want you to see, paint pictures and narratives (for example Sanders is always losing support, and he's always angry and grumpy), to go along with that the pictures they use will be of Sanders being angry because that's all he ever is. He's grumpy and old and angry and that's all that matters and don't you forget it. Oh yeah and black people also don't like him so if you're black you should be like other black people and also not like him. And on and on and on. It's all complete bullshit. Tomorrow there will be another negative opinion piece that you should definitely agree with.
If you don't like the guy, cool. Just make sure you're deciding that for yourself.
Pay attention. They almost all do shit like this to paint pictures that have nothing to do with reality. They will try and choose your president for you. Don't let them.
Things they do is ignore, pick polls/manipulate them so that they agree with what they want you to see, paint pictures and narratives (for example Sanders is always losing support, and he's always angry and grumpy), to go along with that the pictures they use will be of Sanders being angry because that's all he ever is. He's grumpy and old and angry and that's all that matters and don't you forget it. Oh yeah and black people also don't like him so if you're black you should be like other black people and also not like him. And on and on and on. It's all complete bullshit. Tomorrow there will be another negative opinion piece that you should definitely agree with.
If you don't like the guy, cool. Just make sure you're deciding that for yourself.
People need to train themselves on media literacy. It's so goddamn important in this new era of information. Always question who's telling you what and why. ESPECIALLY when you find a media source that has biases that appeal to you the most. The assumption should be that, despite coming from a reputable or trusted source, they're putting a spin on the information even if it's subtle.
But that's probably a pipe dream since a lot of people can't get all the way through a headline before posting their hot take.
Edit: Shit this thread made me tired and angry. I'm getting offline lol. Also, to the mods, could you please give the people who did meaningless drivebys warnings so they'll maybe think twice before shitting up another thread with Sanders in the title? They've successfully derailed every single thread that involves Sanders and it's toxic for actual discussion.
Are these the only mistakes that they've made with the graphics, or have there been other mistakes that disadvantaged other candidates or went in the opposite direction that simply weren't noticed or pointed out? Would anyone even care enough to point out if an MSNBC guest said something uncharitable about Joe Biden? My issue with interpreting this as proof of some secret corporate anti-Sanders agenda is there's no indication this comes from an objective overview of MSNBC's coverage and we all know there is a certain segment of Sanders supporters who are hyper-attuned to what they perceive as bias against their candidate.
User warned: misrepresenting moderation
They won't because they support the shitposting.
I'm not a Bernie supporter, but it's absolutely disgusting to see this bullshit again on the news. This is why people don't trust the media. They're always trying to pull a fast one.
Bernie is a fine candidate, it is annoying to see him downplayed so much. And on this site, I have no idea why Bernie brings out such hatred.
Bernie is a fine candidate, it is annoying to see him downplayed so much. And on this site, I have no idea why Bernie brings out such hatred.
Irrespective of if you like their policies or not there is a definitive media bias against sanders , it's messed up, I like some of his policies but that's irrelevant the media and internet ( google reddit etc) manipulation in the USA is bonkers and as an outsider so blatant it's crazy
Shit I'm not going to watch a bunch of MSNBC to find out. But I think the point is that this goes beyond being uncharitable. If someone criticized Biden on his segregation comments then no one would bat an eye because that's a valid criticism despite being uncharitable. The problem is they're doing Sanders dirty with the shit like "(Sanders) makes my skin crawl" or botching the poll graphics multiple times. If they pulled that kind of stuff on other candidates you'd hear about it. Sanders fans might be "hyper-attuned" but there's precedence for that. We lived through 2016 with all the opinion articles and all the pundits not taking him seriously or actively trying spread distrust and we're still seeing the same shit. I'm sure there's plenty of instances of a percentage of Sanders fans making mountains out of mole hills due to feeling persecuted by the media, but this isn't one of those instances.
I doubt that but I'll message one of them about it.