So take a look at the demographic of the Beehive state. DN is merely a
reflection of the vast majority of it's readers. Give it a rest already!
You're not in love with the DN...that's why we give you the Lib-Trib!
Your time (and ours for sure when it comes to your whining)would be far better
spent curled up with your lib-trib. Same goes for anything Mormon. My kids and
grand-kids live in the Beehive state so I regularly tune in to the DN and enjoy
every chance I can get to make the 10-hour trip.
The article "Crafting Gay Children" by Dr. Reisman (can be found on
defend the family)discusses how the GLBT JOurnalist association boasts that 4
of 5 people who decide what you read in the NY Times are GLBT JOurnalists. These groups have not only shown extreme bias, they have been intentionally
misinforming for political gain. Everyone should read the article, there is an
assault on the family like never before, and the Deseret News comment activists
are part of the effort.
@Belching CowWhy do I read the Deseret News, even though this paper is
clearly biased toward conservative causes and anything related to the Mormon
church?Because the other local option for news, the Salt Lake Tribune, has
a bit of a liberal bias. I read both, because I like to see the news from
multiple perspectives. I find that I usually am more of a liberal, but sometimes
I read the conservative perspective and find that they have a really good point.
Putting yourself in a box when it comes to getting information is silly. How do
you know if you have a good perspective on the news if you refuse to consider
the opinions of people you disagree with?
Comparing the DN and it's slant to the NY times is a joke. Is the DN used
as a national source for other news outlets? The NY times has help in creating
other sources of news that, while some are slanted to their reads/viewers at
least give another perspective.
There is another word for bias, its called "censorship" and often
"politically correct" its the new basis of all american news media.
Excepting a few individual stragglers and small independent local radio stations
that still believe in free speech.Censorship in the form of Civil
contorl has replaced free speech the the right to be emitional and open with the
free speech concept. Free speech is the right to offend, dislike, and not trust
the lies spewed by this new form of Media control. The federal
government has established a national organization of civil socialism the every
major news organization is a memento and told how, what, when, and where they
can report the facts handed to them. This control strips news groups from
independent and unbiased news research and reporting.This national
organization was and is designed to limit free speech and freedom of the press
and civil rights of free speech and it is revealing the reason why one of our
inalienable rights is freedom of speech even if the government controlling news
media wants to censor it.But all this censorship is in vain, we the
people can see through this politically correct and civil hoax.
re:A1994"And apparently by the dwindling circulation of the
Times,"The New York Times increased its circulation by 73% over
the past year with digital editions. It was the largest percentage increase of
any of the largest newspapers in the U.S. "The problem is that
the NY Times doesn't give facts in context"Do you ever read
Belching CowSandy, UTThis is entertaining. Some of the people
posting comments are whining about the DN being right leaning. Why do you guys
read this paper if you dislike it so much? Gluttons for punishment I guess.Because it is a publication run by my church, that speaks for the LDS
people in the state where I come from, a state that was founded by relatives of
mine. My grandfather while President had a dream where he was challenged three
times what he had done with his fathers name. That is part of my families
culture and fabric.Likewise, I am very concerned by what the DN says
as being whole owned by the LDS faith, it is one of the most visual voices of
the church. There is no wall between these two... the DN can not claim it is
not an outlet of the church - no one believes it is otherwise. The Church
claims political neutrality, but its agent, the DN, hardly presents itself that
way. You can't be fish and fowl at the same time. I can not choose to
give up my faith because of the DN, but I can cancel the NYT.
"Comparing the DN to the NYT is like comparing the Ogden Raptors to the New
York Yankees. Give me a break."You are right.... one is owned by
a religion that claims to be non-partisan on its web site, and in actions
through its holdings acts completely differently.And who do you
think has more money, the NYT, or our church..... you are right. It
isn't even close.
After a 40-year career as a Mormon and a reporter, beginning as a copy boy and
cub reporter for the Deseret News, I must say sadly that the pursuit of truth in
journalism has more often put me on the side of the New York Times than the
Deseret News, but both have their weaknesses. The News views the
world as revolving around Salt Lake City with truth emanating from a single
source. The Times is constantly trying to redefine its world, which is much
broader, more complex, more inclusive and often contradictory. I respect and
admire the hard-working reporters and editors for both, but have no doubt where
any top reporter, liberal or conservative, would feel more able to do his or her
job with honesty and integrity. Recognizing and overcoming personal
prejudices, biases, background and pressure from outside and within his or her
own organization are lifelong challenges for any great journalist.
@atl134Good point. I agree with you. The problem is that the NY
Times doesn't give facts in context. And apparently by the dwindling
circulation of the Times, I am not the only one who feels this way. Fox News is
definitely has a conservative slat to it, but they don't try to hide it
either. I think most Americans respect it if you don't try to hoodwink
them. Having said that, MSNBC should really consider trying to hoodwink more
people. Their ratings are the worst.
So the Deseromney News found this story, and attached a picture of President
Obama to it? Nice...
This is entertaining. Some of the people posting comments are whining about the
DN being right leaning. Why do you guys read this paper if you dislike it so
much? Gluttons for punishment I guess.
@lost in DC you really insist on reading a lot more into peoples comments
then are there don't you? well YOU (look I can type in all capital letters
to) have FUN with that.
Saying the NY times is left leaning is like Claud Rains character from
Casablanca saying to Humphrey Bogart's character Rick that he's
shocked to find gambling going on. I guess the only story is that
one of the bigwigs of the NY times admitting some bias, perhaps that is the
bias. But I think everyone that follows news knows that the NY times leans
steeply left while other newspapers like the D-News lean steeply right. Now
everyone go on and take a deep breath...
Not covering Obama's youthful pot smoking? Obama revealed and wrote
about it several years ago, before he ran for president. We've
known about the marijuana for some time.Also, newspapers have a practice
of burying stories that don't come from their own reporters.No matter
where a newspaper places a story in print, it can’t bury it on the web.
Obama's past has already been vetted in detail. Michelle Obama got
extremely negative press during the first campaign. But the Romneys are now the
new kids on the block. Pew Research Center's Project for
Excellence in Journalism reported in a study of media coverage during the 2008
campaign that it didn't so much cast Obama in a favorable light as it
portrayed John McCain in a substantially negative one,
Having bias in a newspaper is admitting that the editorial staff thinks its
readers are idiots who can't reach an honest conclusion if given unbiased
facts. They think that they have to "help" the reader reach their
"desired" conclusion. Instead of performing the duties of the "4th
Estate", they are just on the campaign staff of whichever candidate they
phranc,by saying the DN reflected its readers and implying a bias as a
defense for the NYT's bias, you were, in essence, defending that bias. I
saw nothing from you saying the NYT was wrong to have a bias. The article was
not about the DN, KLS, or any of those other meida outlets you and old man
mention. Nice obfuscation though. ARE you OK with the NYT having a left-wing
bias and claiming fairness?old man,you sit in my house and
KNOW that I watch fox? how utterly Orwellian of you. Of, course, judging by
your previous comments, you would be happy in an Orwellian, 1984 society. And
please, tell me where the article is about the DN, Fox, KLS. nice obfuscation
though. please tell me when I have EVER quoted KLS or Fox. you cannot do it,
because I haven't. You even twisted my comments about matheson's vote
to force catholic hospitals to provide abortions to have something to do with
BO. THAT vote occured before BO was even elected to the senate. Are
fox, KSL, DN balanced? you decide. Fox, probably not, don't watch KSL, DN
I think having some bias, liberal or conservative, is okay, as long as facts and
context are given.
Golly Gee-wiz, isn't this a prime example of the Pot reportng that the
kettle is black? How in the world is this news? What next....
FonNews is neither fair nor balanced? That they have a right leaning
stance..... imagine the shocker that would be.Oh by the way... in
other news, Issac to hit New Orleans on the exact same day7 years later......
but I guess that doesn't impact Utah so lets cover trash news like this....
you know, the stuff just intended to incite more division between people. Patriot..... Time Magazines cover this week is a black in white shot of
Mitt smiling. What issue were you lookng at. Perhaps Time has a special cover
just for "Walmart" shoppers.....
Comparing the DN to the NYT is like comparing the Ogden Raptors to the New York
Yankees. Give me a break.
Lost -- so you're OK with FOX claiming to be fair, but actually having a
strong right bias?
@patriot"NY Times left wing bias - this is not news."Have you ever noticed how biased your own words are? DNews has a right
wing bias - do you consider it news?
NY Times left wing bias - this is not news. Speaking of left wing bias take a
look at the latest Time Magazine cover. I don't take this liberal trash I
just happened to see it in Wallmart. Anyway, Romney has this RED splotchy face
on the cover and Obama is beautifully done in a light majestic light blue. Good
heavens... this is high-schoolish!! These liberal propaganda rags need not
wonder why they have zero credibility and falling.
@lost in dc where did I say that? typical twisting and turning from you
lost. what I did say is that they are no different then the DN,fox, KSL etc..
playing to their readers and viewers, so I suppose you could say I think
they're every bit as "fair" as the DN, KSL, fox etc... so I guess
if your really believe the DN, fox KSL etc... are "fair" then I suppose
I could see why you would wrongly assume I must think the NYT is "fair."
The irony. DNews pushes Romney 24/7 and yet it has the nerve to call other
papers biased? Be real. Be truthful will your fellow man DNews.
Rupert and Roger would crush anyone who does not follow the daily talking points
memo.FN has a bias.The DN has a bias.The NYT
has a bias.So what?
Re: "The thing I wish ALL media would quit doing, however, is referring to
liberals as 'progressives.'"Hear, hear!And, I dislike hearing them called "Liberals," as well. They are
neither liberal nor progressive, according to any sane definition of either
word.The appropriate appellation of people who oppose conserving the
policies, ideals, and morality that made America great would be
"Destructives," NOT "Progressives" or "Liberals."The fact that those who lean left apply these intentionally misleading
monikers to themselves and their fellow travelers in no way requires normal
people to do so.
Jay Tee,"....The thing I wish ALL media would quit doing,
however, is referring to liberals as "progressives...."If
we're going to start calling things by their dictionary names, liberals
would be more accurately described as conservatives. When they defend Social
Security, Medicare, and other such programs, they are the true defenders of the
The New York Times iconic status as the standard of journalistic excellence
against which so many other newspapers measure themselves doesn’t depend
on being unbiased which is something no news enterprise can honestly claim to
be. But its views don’t evidence a liberal conspiracy in which the New
York Times is ring leader. The so-called liberal news media is a right-wing
illusion that far too many on the political right ascribe to.Notice
how the difference of opinion between Arthur Brisbane and Jill Abramson is out
in the open for all to see. Wouldn’t it be grand if all news enterprises
operated like that?
Yes, not so much a revelation as another verification. I think a good
percentage of the population might be learning that main-stream media is a guide
only for naive people who are largely immune to truth. Anyone who's had
personal experience with "journalists" knows well that a good percentage
of them don't actually know everything about everything, which is
completely contrary to their self-proclamations. Comparing what "the
Times" says to reality does reveal a pretty sad commentary on what's
happening to this country and the free world. The thing I wish ALL media would
quit doing, however, is referring to liberals as "progressives." Their
positions of a welfare state where government authority monitors and controls
all facets of society, confiscates private property for redistribution, ignores
many extremely dangerous trends and policies, etc., is anything by
"progressive. In fact, it is ultra-REGRESSIVE and routinely proven to be
My old mama use to tell me “No matter how much you stink, you may not be
able to smell yourself”. I think the same might be true of conservatives
and liberals. For myself the notion of a person being liberal or
conservative with regard to the public media is immaterial. All public media
is owned and operated by businessmen. Judging from the actions of
businessmen in government positions, they all act the same no matter which side
of the aisle they are on.
The Times may be to the left what Deseret News is to the right! The fact the DN
reviews each comment and cherry pic's what they want is truly disheartning!
glad the guy finally came clean. if he had had integrity, he would have done so
BEFORE he left the times.Phranc,so you're OK with the NYT
claiming to be fair, but actually having a strong left bias?
GASP! The times and post are left?? How could it be? When did this debauchery
sneak into such credible, fair news sources?? Good grief. The way executives,
politicians, and media speak using all the smoke screens as if we're all
too stupid to see through it never ceases to amaze me. Then when called out
about it, deny deny deny. We live in a time of moral cowards. Sports,
business, religion, politics. It's everywhere. Fox news is absurdly right
wing? Nooooooooo way. They just really have an affinity for pachyderm. What
blows me away even more is that these fools expect to have a credible voice
with their "hidden" bias and agendas. It's disgraceful.
So the new york times reflects the bias of its "cosmopolitan readers?"
kind of like the DN, KSL and fox news etc.... reflects its readers and viewers
the times don't have a clue on real america. the fact that it is the NYT
says all that needs to be said. left, left, left. obama is their guy.
Does anyone else see the irony in the Deseret News publishing this article?