The Bobcat Nation

Boy, you do not get it. The media has great power in this country and I would fight to my death to defend that right. It is one of the principals that make this country great. The media should be the watchdog of the people. It should report the facts and not opinion unless it is labeled as opinion. The paper should have a balanced approached to reporting news. Unfortunately, your paper, like a lot of papers are so far left on the political scale, that they can see the forest through all the trees.

I think most people just what to read the facts and not a reporters or editors filtered political views. I friend of may served on your Opinion Board (I am not sure if I got the name correct) and he claims it was an fight at every meeting to get a “Conservative” point of view published. He said he lost out on most battles because every other board member had a far left view. Take a look at today’s letters to the editor. There is one letter that basically says, “Do not consume the forest”. I view this as the left of center opinion. Then there is a letter claiming they want a “balanced approach to forest management.” I see this as the middle of the road opinion. Where is the Conservative point of view? You never see that point of view in your paper. I know you think the balanced approach letter is the conservative point of view when it really it is the middle point of view.

What can you do improve the sports page? It would be nice to break some MSU news from time to time. I find it hard to believe that out of town newspapers have better coverage and more breaking news items on MSU sports then the local paper. How about some good articles that pumps up the local fans before a football or basketball game. How about some articles on this week’s opposing team or maybe a section that is devoted to the Big Sky Conference in general. Also, Bozeman is full of students and residents from all across Montana who would love to follow their hometown team. In the comical, you are lucky to get a box score.

Come on BobCatFan, be real. The Chronicle does not have a liberal bias. If it did, it surely would not give Tammy Hall the opportunity every two weeks to chastize readers with her ridiculous conservative platitudes.

The comical never puts in the well thought out and rational conservative stories. The only conservative thought they put in the paper is the far right wing. I cannot even support most of that stuff. For the most part, the comical writings are left of center and sometimes far left of center.

If you look at the political spectrum, it is not a straight line. I think it is more of a circle. On one point on the circle you have fair and honest politics. At the opposite side of the circle, you have absolute power. The wacko's and power hunger on each side of the political spectrum strive to reach the absolute power point on the circle. That is way the media must to be fair and balanced. The media must attack both sides. When was the last time the comical attached the left side of an issue? When was the last a reporter came out said he is a conservative, a republican?

Maybe the comical has improved, since I left Bozeman two years ago. As for the sports page, maybe the new leadership has improved things. The last time I purchased the comical, they did not have a single story all week on the bobcats leading up to the Cat/Griz game. Finally on Saturday, they had something. At that point, I stopped getting the comical.

So you're being critical of a paper that you haven't read for two years?

Is it safe to say that you think ALL media is slanted to the left, so you kind of have a cookie-cutter template criticism about any newspaper?

I read the comical on line when I have the time.

Wait -- let me get this straight. You say that the media should report facts and not opinion, "unless it is clearly labeled as opinion," but the example you cite is today's letters to the editor? You are aware that letters to the editor 1) are opinion, and 2) are not written by the paper's editorial board, right?

You complained that the paper published a letter reflecting a liberal view on an issue and one reflecting a centrist view, but did not publish a letter reflecting a conservative view. Is it possible that no such letter was written, and thus, there was nothing to publish? If you disagree with the views expressed in the letters that did get published, then perhaps you should write a letter expressing your own views.

Or in the alternative, I guess you could just put up a post on an athletics message board whining about how "liberal" the Chronicle is.

If anything the Chronic is probably a tad, like most Mont. papers, conservative. Montana votes conservative in 'most' elections as does the Bozeman area. Many newspapers come out and say what they are, for instance the Chicago Tribune is a conservative paper and prior to election day they come out and say to vote Republican 'mostly', much to the dismay of their readers.

The Missoulian and Standard may lean a bit to the left.


Support our troops, conserve on gasoline.

The Gallatin Valley is fairly conservative ouside the Bozeman city limits. I think most university districts tend to lean to the left quite significantly, but MSU not nearly so much as UM. Very few Republican legislators are elected from the Missoula and Butte areas and the Missoulian and Standard reflect the community views.

Sometimes I think the Chronicle tends to the left, but then they'll surprise with an editorial to the right, so I think they must have some diversity on the editorial staff.

As far as sports coverage goes, I think Jeff is trying, but a bit cynical as has been mentioned. Guess that's just his style, but the coverage has definitley improved. I miss Jeff Robinson on MSU coverage because he had a great relationship with the coaches and athletic staff and probably never got "scooped".

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/newsweek_quran

This is why the press must get its facts correct. Peoples lives can be on the line when the press starts to report rumors.

BobCatFan wrote:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/newsweek_quran

This is way the press must get its facts correct. Peoples lives can be on the line when the press starts to report rumors.

I agree completely, and I wish all U.S. news organizations would put hard facts ahead of items that might spark hysteria among the religious communities. The overt religious conservative bias shown on this story and many others is a disservice to the American people. Or maybe it was just bad reporting ... who knows?

This bothers me a great deal more than the Dan Rather misinformation reporting that by and large forced CBS to ask Rather to step down. Wish they'd just report the facts and forget about being the next "Watergate" scoop group. Have to watch BBC and the Canadian news today to get a decent idea as to what actually happens. Guess you have to chalk it up to another case of a journalism school turning reporters out with not much training in ethics--what kind of school do you have to enroll in to become a journalist None of the land grant institutions offer this field do they?

Cat Grad wrote:This bothers me a great deal more than the Dan Rather misinformation reporting that by and large forced CBS to ask Rather to step down. Wish they'd just report the facts and forget about being the next "Watergate" scoop group. Have to watch BBC and the Canadian news today to get a decent idea as to what actually happens. Guess you have to chalk it up to another case of a journalism school turning reporters out with not much training in ethics--what kind of school do you have to enroll in to become a journalist None of the land grant institutions offer this field do they?

I wouldn't blame journalism schools for the ethical lapses of their graduates any more than I would blame law schools for the ethical lapses of attorneys. It's the individual's responsibility to know and respect his ethical duties. Law schools (and journalism schools too, I'm sure) do everything they can to ensure that their students understand their ethical duties -- is it really the school's fault if an individual's motivation to win a case (or get a story) causes him to ignore what he was taught?

Oh, I don't know. Something about you're guilty by association may apply here I've listened for many years to my primary professions slams: Those who can do, those who can't teach and those who can't teach teach p.e. I don't know why many in the profession all the sudden are crying: People are dead because he didn't have the facts straight when in fact slanted reporting have caused many deaths otherwise and before now. One must trust yet verify the sources--and consider the sources. Remember the "polls" a few years ago that ranked various professions on the sleaze factor? That is, who did the American public trust the least? Anyway, we all have more than a few that'll do anything for a buck.