Skip to main content

The New York Times had a story on Sunday entitled: "On the Sunday Morning Talk Shows, a Rather Familiar Cast of Characters" It mainly talks about how certain Senators - e.g., McCain and Graham -- are booked at much higher rate than other Senators Anyway, it includes a graphic that totals all appearances by all Senators and, guess what they found? Here goes:

Of 641 total appearances by senators since 2010, 369 were by Republicans, 247 were by Democrats and 25 were by independents (22 of those by Joseph I. Lieberman.)
It's even worse if you think about the lack of progressive voices on these shows. Pat Leahy has only been on 6 times.  Sheldon Whitehouse has never been on. Tea partiers, surprise, surprise, have been on a LOT. Liberal media my ass.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Dems In, Repubs on Sunday Talk for Balance. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skillet, wader, dougymi

    Repubs in, Repubs on Sunday talk for information.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 08:10:07 AM PDT

  •  Well, yeah, of course. TV is entertainment. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gchaucer2

    You could have nice, sane, polite Dems making sense about reasonable policy ideas, or you could have R's- the political equivalent of professional wrestlers....

    I know which one is gonna sell more beer...

  •  Sunday shows (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greenotron

    are anachronisms run by a cabal of powerful executives who are probably as old as the members of the Politburo when the Berlin Wall fell. Long gone are the days when citizens could tune in on Sunday mornings to hear the policy makers themselves questioned about their policies. Even before the internet came along, the power elite had figured out how to catapult the propaganda. Remember when The McGlaughlin Report was something politicians paid attention to? Except for MSNBC the Sunday Morning line-ups are essentially vanity projects designed to stroke the egos of top programming execs and top advertising clients. They are essentially a "museum of branding" with the number one aim being to placate and mollify the backwards, regressive and crotchety old dudes still pissed off they somehow missed out on the Sexual Revolution.

  •  They like to book people with a strong ideological (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Liberal Capitalist

    bias.  That's one of the points in the article.  

    Since Democrats tend not to take strong stands on anything they are not ideological enough.  Spinelessness does not sell on TV talk shows so it's not unexpected that Repubs would be favored.  They have strong opinions and are not afraid to voice them.  Wishy-washy, reactive, always-on-the-defensive Dems are boring.

    The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

    by accumbens on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 08:46:45 AM PDT

    •  Entertainment value doesn't measure competence (0+ / 0-)

      Having strong conviction that you know the  answer, regardless of the facts or the analysis, will make you someone who can speak with great sincerity and conviction.

      It has nothing to do with getting at a good answer on policy questions.

      Dems are cowardly and non-confrontational on political questions--they won't call out Reps.  And they tend to use facts or analysis in policy questions more often than Reps.  So, not entertaining.

      •  don't agree (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sharman, dougymi

        shows are scared of being called out so they reflexively ask for GOPs. Sheldon Whitehouse and other dems are good on TV. The generalization doesn't hold up.

        But, the idea that the shows push the fight narrative does  (and so promote the other side) does hold up.

        This is embarrassing for the producers and bookers.

        •  no it isn't. They don't care. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          VClib

          As long as they get eyeballs, they don't give a shit. Embarrassment isn't possible as long as they can justify it by citing viewership.   Besides, teevee producers are incapable of embarrassment. You have to have a sense of shame before embarrassment affects you.  That particular sense doesn't exist in the producer world.

          A learning experience is one of those things that says, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' Douglas Adams

          by dougymi on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 10:47:36 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  If the argument (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Liberal Capitalist, VClib

    is that the media is biased toward Republicans I think this would be a more persuasive statistic if it included administration representatives in the mix.

    It seems to me that the shows would have a tendency to invite representatives of the President to defend his party's position rather than members of Congress, which is the logical choice when that party is out of the White House. It would be a reasonable guess that including appearances of presidential representatives would present a more balanced picture.

    Don't mistake what I am saying. I do believe that the media does lean in a rightward direction but I am presenting this comment only to warn that if anyone wants to use this statistic out in the real world where they might be challenged, they need to be prepared to answer questions about why presidential representatives are not included in the mix.

    The world is a den of thieves and night is falling. -Ingmar Bergman

    by Pirogue on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 08:52:17 AM PDT

    •  It's a pretty good statistic (0+ / 0-)

      why undermine it or excuse the shows?

      •  Did you read my whole comment? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        VClib, PhilK

        I said that he reason I was making the comment is to warn anyone who might use this statistic that they need to be prepared for the obvious comeback, that it does not include Presidential representatives.

        And since when is trying to get an accurate picture considered undermining? I think it is to the credit of progressives that we are as interested in the weaknesses of our own arguments as we in the weaknesses of the other side.

        The world is a den of thieves and night is falling. -Ingmar Bergman

        by Pirogue on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 09:11:49 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  The Media Has A Conservative Bias (0+ / 0-)

    "Don't Let Them Catch You With Your Eyes Closed"

    by rssrai on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 09:15:05 AM PDT

  •  and? (0+ / 0-)

    Little is gonna change that. It's been reported for years and it hasn't changed yet.  The only thing that will change it is for ratings to drop off a cliff.  Don't watch them. Don't comment on them. Find something better to do on sunday mornings.  That's the only way things will change and I'm not real sure even that will do it.  It's still the best course of action.  Public pressure has done absolutely nothing to change the way the nets behave.

    A learning experience is one of those things that says, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' Douglas Adams

    by dougymi on Mon Jun 10, 2013 at 10:43:36 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site