Mad As Hell and Not Going to Take It
Wednesday, December 3, 2008 at 05:32PM In this Orwellian world of ours, of doublespeak and Obama worship, of political bullying and media cover-up, John Ziegler stands apart; John Ziegler prefers the truth.
For several years, John Ziegler was the host of a nightly radio show in Los Angeles. Ziegler wrote a book, The Death of Free Speech, and I often listened to John as he railed against political correctness, and the liberal bias inherent in today's politically correct taboos. Ziegler states that he is more libertarian than conservative, and more conservative than liberal; he prefers the Republican Party over the Democrats only because the Republicans are the lesser of two evils.
The 2008 Presidential elections stand out as one of the most poorly reported campaign battles of all times. Main Stream Media outlets abandoned all pretense of objective reporting and instead of even-handed reporting, the MSM became open advocates for Barack Obama. Speaking about the media coverage of Sarah Palin, Newt Ginrich summed it up: "This is like watching Pravda. This is a one-sided, vicious, unending and dishonest campaign."
Ziegler is making a documentary about this media malpractice; he commissioned a Zogby poll and the results were startling. Obama supporters are exceptionally ill-informed about Obama and the Democrats in Washinton DC.
I recently blogged about this and many readers out there in ATW- land blamed the messenger, and the message. Don't feel bad if I am describing you; you weren't alone. After much criticism even John Zogby, the pollster, backed off from the findings: "I believe there was value in the poll we did. I also believe it was not our finest hour. This slipped through the cracks. It came out critical only of Obama voters."
So, Ziegler commissioned another poll; he is vindicated! Obama voters are ill-informed, and the media outlets that inform the Obama voter are to blame. In answer to the question:"Which party currently controls Congress?" far more of the McCain voters were correct compared to the Obama voters. Those who watch Fox News got the question correct (64-25) compared to those who watch CNN (48-38)!
That, my friends, is media malpractice.
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (34)
I saw Ziegler on Fox last night. Poor Alan Colmes couldn't lay a glove on him.
Even the Wall Street Journal noted Ziegler's Zogby poll was flawed.
In any event, the attempt to portray the millions of victorious Obama voters as misinformed is silly and predictable.
Conservative Talk Radio host, John Ziegler is holding the MSM feet to the fire.
Ironic, eh? Isn't "truth to power" a MSM slogan?
Mahons: Yep, I noted that there were many critics of the Zogby poll. That's why this new poll was taken. It's not about Republican v. Democrat, or even well-informed v. ill-informed.
It's about the dinosaur medias blatant disregard for any objectivity during the 2008 presidential race. Media malpractice.
Even many media actors themselves have completely conceded that they were totally in love with Obama .
Think of Chris Mathews's on air statement that he gets " a little tingle up his leg " when he thinks of Obama. Yuck. Never heard a talk radio / Fox guy say such a thing.
Mahons, noting that 2008 media malpractice is "silly," is like noting that Orwell's Animal Farm is "silly."
You're the silly one.
Patty - I exhibit the silliness of those who have been proven correct. Of course it suits you to pretend that your side lost because the other side was uninformed. Ah sour grapes make for such poor whine.
Mahons: It's not pretend; it's scientifically proven with the 2 polls.
Of course, you can say the polls are flaws. Or, you can dispute the findings. But there is overwhelming evidence that the media operated as the unpaid PR-wing of the Democrat Party.
And there is no - i repeat, no -- evidence to the contrary. Do you know of any research proving your assertion that the MSM are unbiased?
At this point I doubt you'd even get many editors or journalism profs who would deny for a second that the media was was in the tank for Obama.
Which is NOT why McCain lost. But it's an observable fact anyway. And that media bias didn't just start when Obama declared in Iowa, either.
A huge number of voters both sides are ignorant, and to the extent that they are getting info from a media that essentially admits that it was shilling for one candidate, they're going to be ignorant but tending towards the one. That one.
Patty - please please tell me you don't now claim that polls are scientific proof.
There certainly are biased members of the media, biased papers and biased newstations. I never said anything to the contrary. But they certainly are not all, and most Obama voters, like most McCain voters, can identify a bias when they see it and still make informed decisions.
Phantom - If you haven't heard people make strange remarks like Matthews (who seems to make them more and more) then may I ask - have you been listening?
Phantom
"I saw Ziegler on Fox last night. Poor Alan Colmes couldn't lay a glove on him."
Not that you're biased.
This was the second time that Ziegler has appeared on Hannity & Colmes to discuss his supposed findings that because of liberal media bias, Obama voters were misinformed and ignorant. Colmes challenged that thesis. Last night, he noted that, “23 percent of Texans are convinced that Democratic (President Elect) Obama is a Muslim.” Colmes asked, “What does that tell about people listening to what they hear on the media, in that case, the conservative media?”
Ziegler replied, “Actually, Alan, if you look at (Obama's) history in Indonesia, he was registered as a Muslim. That's a rational answer. Even though he's not today.”
By the same token I guess it must be correct to say that Republicans controlled congress before this past election, since if you look at the history of congress, they did indeed control congress before this past election. Even though they don't today. (Now if anyone had asked that question of Palin, it's anyone's guess as to what she would have answered, all we know is if she got it wrong then it would have been 'gotcha journalism' and further evidence - as if any evidence were needed! - of bias).
As for the rest of the questions, they show that people who voted McCain are better able to recognise McCain talking points (and they're none too good at that either).
Still at least they could name the news sources they followed - more than their VP candidate managed, eh?
Frank
Not that you're biased.
Don't be thoughtless. I spent more time watching the BBC News, where they spent a full ten minutes on a puff piece glorifying a US Navy prosecutor who worked at Gitmo, and who now has switched sides and thinks Gitmo is somehow bad
They sent a crew to his hometown in Erie PA, they showed him kneeling at church, they had loving images of him standing by a lake. I think that they'll wind up building a statue to the man some day. But I didn't once mention that.
BBC News is good, and they're no more biased than ABC / NBC / CBS / NY Times.
But still the lib fixation with Fox continues. Can't use any Fox references straight, gotta get in a dig, but the BBC is as honest as the day is long.
Damned Fox for breaking up the clique!
Phantom,
"Don't be thoughtless"
Right back at ya.
I invite you to consider the possibility that the reason you thought Colmes 'couldn't lay a glove' on Zeigler was because YOU are not exactly neutral on the topic. Nothing about Fox or BBC.
Declaring victory is never an argument.
Tell that to some of those who spoke yesterday
There's a lot of yahooing among liberals about Fox that is completely unfair. Fox is no more biased in its news reporting than the stations you cherish.
I like Colmes who did his best. But he did not successfully challenge any of the premises of the Zogby poll in question. You know, the thing we're talking about.
Phantom,
" But he did not successfully challenge any of the premises of the Zogby poll in question. "
Not successfully, according to you.
Zogby offered to do a fair and neutral poll and Ziegler refused. Wonder why?
"I am happy to do a poll of both Obama voters and McCain voters, with questions that I formulated and sponsored either by an objective third party or by someone on the left, in tandem with a John Ziegler on the right -- but poll questions that have my signature," Zogby said.
Sounds like a useful poll to run. Unless of course you're Ziegler and prefer the questions misleading and stacked.
Notice for example that the one McCain question Ziegler allowed to be added 'for balance' (where balance = ~10 to 1), McCain voters did badly on. A fact that Colmes did draw attention to - unsuccessfully in your case.
Ah, as is often, its not what they say, its what they leave out. Here's what Zogby also said here
"We stand by the results our survey work on behalf of John Ziegler, as we stand by all of our work. We reject the notion that this was a push poll because it very simply wasn't. It was a legitimate effort to test the knowledge of voters who cast ballots for Barack Obama in the Nov. 4 election. Push polls are a malicious effort to sway public opinion one way or the other, while message and knowledge testing is quite another effort of public opinion research that is legitimate inquiry and has value in the public square. In this case, the respondents were given a full range of responses and were not pressured or influenced to respond in one way or another. This poll was not designed to hurt anyone, which is obvious as it was conducted after the election. The client is free to draw his own conclusions about the research, as are bloggers and other members of society. But Zogby International is a neutral party in this matter. We were hired to test public opinion on a particular subject and with no ax to grind, that's exactly what we did. We don't have to agree or disagree with the questions, we simply ask them and provide the client with a fair and accurate set of data reflecting public opinion." - John Zogby
It's very hard to understand how anyone would think that questions like "which party controls Congress" are loaded. They're not. You simply can't have a more neutral quesiton than that.
Someone's embarrassed at the poll results, thats all.
To Phantom/Patty/Troll/Charles and all other Americans here who weren't fooled by the brainwashing MSM.
Can you explain why you were not duped into voting for Obama where apparently millions of your fellow citizens wer unable to make their own informed judgments before enterig the polling booths.
I've been pro-McCain since 1999 or 2000 and saw Obama as a blank slate. Which is largely what he was. I am warming to him after his cabinet choices but that is now.
Why some Democrats and Republicans make uninformed judgments is a question I cannot answer.
Except that here, as stated, there was great dissatisfaction at the incumbent that was taken out on McCain, a huge financial crisis that McCain appeared clueless about, a great deal of excitement about a legitimate black candidate with a shot. None of these three things were necessarily fair, none necessarily demonstrate a thought process, but this was the hand that McCain was dealt.
Notice for example that the one McCain question Ziegler allowed to be added 'for balance' (where balance = ~10 to 1),
Frank, of course, THAT fact is the crucial factor in this 'scientific poll.'
Phantom
I just think the views expressed here by Patty and David and some others that the American people only elected Obama because they are too dim to see through Media bias (unlike those who express that view) is very patronising and arrogant.
Colm
I think that even if the media were all pro McCain that he still would have lost. The planets were not aligned for him.
He ran a poor campaign and he had bad fortune.
That having been said, media bias is a real thing for anyone with eyes and ears to observe it.
And its hilarious to see the continuing venom directed at one little Fox News that is not even an over the air channel when there is so much less bile directed at the hydra heads of the liberal beast.
Don't think that this isn't a factor in the rapid decline in American newspapers and in network news. It's not all to be blamed on technology. There are many factors and this is one of them.
Phantom
I do accept that there was a Pro-Obama bias in general. He had the zeitgeist as they say, like Tony Blair did here in 1997, but why can't Republican supporters here just accept that there was a popular desire by the American people to elect him if only as a breath of fresh air. They weren't bullied or fooled or tricked into it. The US is not North Korea and even with a biased MSM there is a huge range of discussion information and media sources for Americans to choose from and your countries citizens are perfectly capable of making up their own minds.
'I just think the views expressed here by Patty and David and some others that the American people only elected Obama because they are too dim to see through Media bias (unlike those who express that view) is very patronising and arrogant.
'
Not to mention that it is also the liberal elite out of those awful Ivy League schools( yes the top schools in the world) who are also Obama voters and backers.
Ah well, anyway...
I don't have a problem with that. There was a desire to throw the bums out and to have a fresh start with a new and intriguing person at the top.
Phantom,
"Ah, as is often, its not what they say, its what they leave out. Here's what Zogby also said here"
Well indeed - so let's see what you left out.
First up, you are quoting from a Zogby press release, and not John Zogby:
But on Wednesday, Zogby told me he was on a book tour* when the contract was reached and when the survey was conducted, and wouldn’t have approved the poll in the form it took, or a press release posted on his firm’s Web site. “This was not Zogby International’s finest hour,” he said. “Something, somehow, fell through the cracks.” He said he would review the incident with his staff on Friday to determine what went wrong. Nonetheless, Zogby stood by the results of the poll themselves. “There is valuable information in this poll,” he said.
Second:
Zogby said he wouldn’t have approved the poll without including McCain supporters. “A more honest poll would have been conducted had we also focused on McCain people,” he said. He added that some of the questions weren’t worded fairly.
http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/zogbys-misleading-poll-of-obama-voters-459/
And once again - Zogby offered to do a decent and neutral poll. Someone didn't want that. That persons name was John Ziegler.
Phantom
You mean bring in a clean and freshly wiped new bum :)
divided by a common language again!!
"a huge financial crisis that McCain appeared clueless about"
Oddly enough there was little sign that this made any difference in the polls.
If you were looking for an inflection point in the polls, I don't think you would find it there. You'd find it after the selection of Palin.
Yep. You say Marxist we say Messiah :)
Colm: This is not about who won or lost the election. ( I don't think McCain would have been a terribly good President, anyway.)
It's about telling the truth. Something the MSM is not keen to do when the truth runs counter to an Editor's agenda. Despicable I think.
The MSM is too influential not to be held accountable for unprofessional practices.
The Ombudsman of the Washington Post has admitted that the coverage in their paper tilted towards Obama. They admit it.
Palin is really weird because that from what I hear most will share my view that though she was and is good in her current position that she is and would be a complete embarrassment on a national stage, and as for international, fughettaboutit
But there are continuing reports that she is a rock star in some parts of the country, including Georgia where she really helped Chambliss win that Senate seat.
--
Frank
My 8:39 is a verbatim quote by John Zogby himself, as printed on the Zogby.com site.
--
Whether the polls reflect it or not, the economics killed McCain. As did the fact that he looked old on TV as compared with the young, assured, guy beside him. This was Nixon Kennedy all over. No one would admit it to a pollster, but it was devastating.
An interesting addendum to the voting issue re: Prop 8
http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_11131721?nclick_check=1
I liked that video not simply because Ziegler challenged the left, but also because Ziegler was challenged by a leftist (Colmes) at the same time as his case was being backed by a rightist (Hannity). That is balance.
As far as Obama supporters are concerned, many of them don't want to know of anything which would disturb their mindset. That goes for many on the right but I'd say from experience that moving to the right is what one does as one goes through life and finds out that things are not as one believed them to be in one's years of immaturity. Example: Africa is poor because of Africans and not because I happen to be in a well-paid job.