MSNBC, Pew found, had by far the most pro-strike sentiment, with a whopping 64%

[dkf]

Poll after poll after poll has found that a large majority of Americans opposed a strike on Syria.

But Pew found that, "in the week studied, the overall percentage of cable stories conveying a message that America should get involved (47% ) solidly outnumbered stories with messages counseling against a strike (27%)."

The breakdowns are striking. For Al Jazeera, pro-strike messages outnumbered anti-strike ones by 43-24%. On CNN, it was 45-23. On Fox News, it was 45-20.

MSNBC, Pew found, had by far the most pro-strike sentiment, with a whopping 64%. But the network also had far more messages of opposition (39%) than its counterparts.

Even so, Americans tuning in to their news networks saw a debate that was far more skewed in favor of the pro-strike view than the debate happening off-screen.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3940141?ref=topbar

[bbgrunt]

1. very interesting. k and r

[Jackpine Radical]

3. Interesting on several levels.

For one thing, it's fascinating that Al J so closely paralleled the US M$M.

[Uncle Joe]

5. I believe they're based out of Qatar, being a Gulf State most of which

supports the rebels against Syria and its' primary backer Iran.

[Jackpine Radical]

6. I think they're at least a semi-official Qatari governmental entity.

[babylonsister]

2. m$m trying to shape the newz and it didn't work.

I'm glad it didn't, but this sucks.

[BlueToTheBone]

4. Love to know the breakdown times

i.e., Morning Smo and Rachel

[Uncle Joe]

7. Perhaps this is part of the reason for those poll numbers.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023686690

Though the mainstream U.S. news media and some non-governmental organizations highlighted the UN findings that tended to bolster the U.S. government’s case against the Syrian government, a close reading of the 38-page report reveals contradictions to that conclusion.

For instance, the UN inspectors found surprisingly little evidence of Sarin gas at the first neighborhood that they visited on Aug. 26, Moadamiyah, south of Damascus. Of the 13 environmental samples collected that day, none tested positive for chemical weapons and the two laboratories used by the inspectors had conflicting results regarding chemical residue that can be left behind by degraded Sarin.

(snip)

These mainstream U.S. news reports did not cite the cautionary comments contained in the UN report about possible tampering with evidence, nor did they take into account the conflicting lab results in Moadamiyah compared with Zamalka/Ein Tarma.

Not that I would cast aspersions against the corporate media's brainwashing/propaganda power and lack of journalistic ethics, but I do.

Thanks for the thread, dkf.

[rosesaylavee]

8. No doubt all SIX owners of our media stood to benefit from a strike...

move along now, nothing more to see.

[reusrename]

9. MSNBC had 103% responses.

That is unusual.

[cthulu2016]

10. Maybe even the ads were pro-strike

[lissyap]

11. Hi

thanks for the news

[dkf]

12. You are welcome!