Re: New York Times selling TV stations

On 14 Sep 2006 07:57:36 -0700, "Indoarsman" <indoarsman@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Earl wrote:

What if most of the TVs, radio, newspapers were owned/managed by
Democrats, or Muslims or even members of the Communist Party.

Would you be worried about having your news slanted?

The other night I heard Bill O'Reilly quote the statistics from a
survey conducted by some "liberal" university (I think it was
Columbia). They found that 75% of the news media are "secular
progressives". Secular progressive is O"Reilly's favorite term, so the
university might actually have said liberal, or something else.

Indoarsman

I didn't know O'Reilly was religiously inclined. Didn't he
have a mild scandal about a female intern? I don't watch his
show. What is the meaning he gives to "secular progressive"?
What does he find wrong with being "secular"? I fail to
understand in general why "secular" is a dirty word.

Webster's defines it thusly:

1 a : of or relating to the worldly or temporal <secular concerns> b :
not overtly or specifically religious <secular music> c : not
ecclesiastical or clerical <secular courts> <secular landowners>

.

Relevant Pages