I wanted to wait for Bruce to answer, but here's my read on TV news.  The reporters, assignment editors and line producers are generally more interested in getting a good story.  They aren't looking for any specific angle, just reporting the facts as best they can. 

The problems start when you get up to the executive producer and beyond levels.  They are the people that can bend and twist a show into a particular point of view.  I once worked on a nightly news program where one of the EP's would literally rewrite all of the news stories just before air to give them a liberal slant.  It didn't matter what the story was, but it had to slam consertives or republicans in one way or another.

Once you get beyond the day-to-day operation of the newsroom, it's all about the numbers.  Both costs and ratings numbers.  That's why in November, Feb. and May you see massive stories on "simple home appliances that can KILL YOU".

Oh, and next year sweeps won't be in Feb.  With the big DTV transition, sweeps have been moved to March.  Can't have people not able to see TV during ratings times!

The "secret Muslim, pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel, leftist" President chooses a Jewish, centrist Clintonite with a bit of a reputation of being a hard ass as his Chief of Staff, and people complain?

****

I mean... Rahm's father was in the freakin' Irgun!

The elephant in the room is the overall left-wing bias of the newspaper industry. The problem isn't so much that this bias exists, but that people within the industry refuse to acknowledge it. There's a real "Emperor's New Clothes" mentality at work.

Bruce being a news junkie I have to disagree, I used to read the newspaper everyday without fail and if it was true that their liberal leaning was the reason they lost readers I would be still reading it, because it would be preaching to the choir. But during the last eight years with bush being the idiot he was and the lies he told on the build up to the invasion of Iraq, no one seemed to investigate the truth. It just seemed they regergitated what they were being fed.

Here is the thing though, on those rare occasions when newspapers did report honest news stories about Iraq, people cried foul and were told they were unAmerican left leaners. For the last eight years Bush and those that supported him created this mess and the newspapers went right along with him.

I also left because the internet is paperless and a more instant news source. Plus as we have found out, Bush did lie and those that called the reporters left leaners were wrong, they were just trying to report the truth.

Victor Rodgers said: "I assume the wee ones nearby kept you from going on a tirade. You are a better man than me."

*************

Not the wee ones, just didn't want to make the future bus waits more of a strain.

Her attitude reminds me of my mother who, during the Reagan years said (and I do indeed quote): "I don't care whether he knows what he's doing or is good for the country...he makes *me* feel good!"

Lars Johansson wrote: American slavery, sadly, is something found only in America.

That's like saying "American sitcoms, sadly, are something found only in America."  Well duh!  Of course it is when you put the qualifier of "American" at the head of that sentence.  As far as slave trade goes, however, it was going on long before America was even a country and, I might add, long before a white man ever stepped foot on what is now American soil.  Slavery is not indigenous to America.

As to the rest of your comments, I don't know whether it's the language barrier or what but you make no sense to me whatsoever: "Which leaves him with that shade of brown, so he can perform speeches as the President a sunny day without getting skin cancer, which is good." Huh?  What?  That's relevant to the discussion...how?

As far as slave trade goes, however, it was going on long before America was even a country and, I might add, long before a white man ever stepped foot on what is now American soil.  Slavery is not indigenous to America.

The Slave Trade is still going on.  The Triangle Trade may have ended but human beings are still being bought and sold like chattel.

Well duh!  Of course it is when you put the qualifier of "American" at the head of that sentence.

In other parts black people could as well be the slave traders. it's only in America he represents some kind of slave race. Our prime minster's ancestor was most likely black, a Swedish king had a black guy as his best friend, there is a statue of him here.

..(About brown skin, less skin cancer)That's relevant to the discussion...how?

I thought when I was little and heard Jesse Jackson talking about being born by a teenage mother that it was the conditions he was talking about.

As far as slave trade goes, however, it was going on long before America was even a country and, I might add, long before a white man ever stepped foot on what is now American soil.

Slave trading has nothing to do with the white man. In Kenya there is nothing resembling America, so I would say that he looks like an African-American though he isn't, but he doesn't look much like them either, does he really (?), so it could just as well be another race, not that I care, but I doubt that it's the same, it could be or it could not be.

As to the rest of your comments, I don't know whether it's the language barrier

When I wrote You can't mean that differentiating is something you want to keep and that this is a problem tou you, how it will be implicated? I meant implemented. Other than that I think it was pretty much alright.