I'd say they cater to whichever one will keep them from getting a shitstorm from their consumers, and that tends to be liberal.

Conservatives are often depicted as villains, hellbent on forcing the "world" to live by their beliefs. I've noticed how easily conservative views are condemned in the media, and while I myself do disagree with just about every conservative view out there, I must admit it can be a bit unfair.

Even then, I'd also be lying if I said I didn't believe conservative agendas are quite coercive, but that's a different subject altogether.

I'm a conservative with a libertarian streak up my back. I can say that I feel unwanted by most news channels. MSNBC and CNN cater to the left and Fox to core conservatives. While my viewpoint leads me, often, to agree with Fox, they're sensationalism and distrust of Libertarians is a turn massive turn off. At this point I watch both FOX and CNN then Google the issue myself.

Pretty much the only show I watch consistently on a news channel is RedEye, and that's for entertainment- which leads me to another issue.

Certain shows are not news. If you watch the Rachel Maddow Show or Hannity for news, you are an idiot. Those are opinion shows. While I do believe there is a slant both ways, depending on the channel, when it comes to real reporting, the fact is that the majority of programs -according to a pew research poll- on MSNBC, CNN, and FOX are opinion programs. There's nothing wrong with opinion programs, if you know the issue and want Bill O'Reilly or Chris Mathews to give you ideological reinforcement, then go ahead. The problem is going in blind. So many people don't get that these shows aren't proper news; it's indoctrination of the stupid and breeds radicalism and partisanship.

To both Riyakou and coltess, what about the points I made, regarding the lack of non-white protagonists, especially female ones, and the often negative portrayal of interracial relationships? Doesn't it seem odd that a supposedly liberal media doesn't seem to have really made a difference as far as gender and racial equality go?

Sure, cons are publicly bashed, but it clearly doesn't solve the problems I've brought up.

I did read about people being subconsciously bigoted. Meaning that while they'd condemn say, a politician for making an homophobic remark, if they watched a movie featuring an homosexual or a lesbian as the main character, and not, you know, some cheap token, complete with passionate, convincing love scenes, they'd probably hate it. They, however, wouldn't admit that they're being homophobic, and pathetically try to explain why they're not. They're conditioned to consciously condemn bigotry, while they're simultaneously conditioned to to be subconsciously bigoted. Constant explosure to negative stereotypes, without the "appropriate" words being used to refer to them (like the n-word), seem to do that.

I realize it sounds like a conspiracy theory, but it certainly makes some sense. But if it's not the reason non-white/non-straight protagonists are still so rare, then I'm all ears as to why that is. Aren't liberals supposed to be you know, progressive? We're only just now getting a few more shows featuring black women in the leading role, like Scandal. But Scandal doesn't really count anymore, seeing as the main character, Olivia Pope, has been reduced to a whipping girl on her own show.

If this were before 1995, I'd be right with you; however, since around that time, the media has become much more "on board" with liberal concepts, especially the LGBT movement.

Nowadays, it seems stereotypically gay men are glorified in the media and treated as rock stars, while anyone who opposes the idea of being gay are immediately deemed hateful bigots. I'm not really complaining, considering I'm bisexual, but I must admit it is a bit extreme.

Even with race, the moment someone speaks out against a group that isn't white, all hell breaks loose. Paula Dean got canned for a racial slur she uttered over a decade ago. As a black guy, I thought that was total bullshit. The liberal premise of free expression and social tolerance has gone a bit overboard, to the point where people can't say shit anymore.

Now, don't get me wrong, I tend to side more with liberals than conservatives, but I'd honestly like it if there were a more equal turf for both sides within the media, and this is coming from someone who hates virtually all conservative views. Still, they have just as much of a right to speak their views as anyone else, and it is a bit messed up how easily they are condemned simply for what they believe.

I fully support one's right to feel and discuss their displeasure with my sexuality. It's alright with me, gives me something to laugh at anyway. lol However, it seems that the nation is slowly moving towards a grand liberal position, and the media's been there for a minute.

I think Riyakou did a very good job of explaining it, and pointed out a very big problem in the news media today. Taking offense on another's behalf. Now, ok, it's one thing if you're walking down the street and someone utters an ethnic, homophobic, racial, whatever slur at your friend whom you're walking with. It's a totally different issue when a WASP from Connecticut slams Paula Dean for being a dumbass XX numbers of years ago. What this nonsense results in is phony outrage, and it drowns out real problems.

Now, I grew up on a Native American Reservation, my great-great-grandfather was a Swedish immigrant who paid a very large sum to the Native peoples to buy his Ranch from them. I have known Native people all of my life, and their culture -because I grew up around it -is infused into mine. I am not Native, I don't claim to be, but I'm what they call a "Res-boy." I grew up on the reservation.

I pisses me the fuck off when a Caucasian, WASP, from Virginia accuses my family of RAPING and PILLAGING the native people, forcing them onto reservations, and then taking a piece of the reservation from them. (Really happened.) A poor Swedish immigrant in the 1880s scraped together what he could, went west, bought a piece of land fairly from the native people whom welcomed him with open arms, and a person who has never stepped 1-Inch West of the Mississippi is accusing him of RAPE.

Now, don't think I'm accusing you of Phony outrage- I'm not- there's actually a legitimate question your asking. However, the legitimacy of that question becomes easily perverted, and we see that a lot in the news media today- by both Conservatives and Liberals. It's disgusting, and when I was younger I bought into it.

There was a time in this country where if Democrats didn't like your ideas, you'd just switch parties and vice-versa. There was no form-fitting Republican or Democrat. Look at us now. Every Liberal need be a 1/82 Choctaw with a lesbian daughter in a biracial relationship who experimented with pot a bit in college (but is too cowardly to take a stance on it now) and every Conservative need be a dark haired protestant with a plastic smile, a concealed weapons permit, and bleeds apple pie when he's cut by his Pittsburgh Steel Bowie knife.

I really don't know why there aren't as many minority reporters. It's actually a good topic for a sociology experiment. Maybe there's just very little emphasis to enter journalism in certain cultures within the U.S. Or maybe there is a sense of underlying racism that still permeates television. I really don't know.

However, to quote a great musical, "Everyone's a Little Bit Racist"

The American media caters to disenfranchised, tired people who want easy answers and goals without having to think for themselves because they are too overburdened to do that from home.

And idiots.

Pretty much this. The best advice I can give is to do your own research and form your own opinions. Don't accept what mainstream media attempts to feed you.

In the end no one wins.
I used to be a libertarian, until Ted Cruz and his asshole party took over.
Now I'm just neutral.