Posted on 06/22/2004 9:25:39 AM PDT by Tamzee
I know it's a study from last year but I checked FR archives and it was never posted here. I thought it would be important to spread the info and a good resource on media bias to add to our database.
Easy enough to tell if a liberal network is balanced.
The conservative positions are well known and well published.
Measure how often those are mentioned, how completely they are explained, and whether the substance/tone was prejudiced.
It is interesting to note with regard to the argument that a free market would produce a relatively unbiased media that this point might still be right. As noted, the broadcast media was far from a free market. However, what could have also been noted is that for the past 50 or so years the newspaper business has also not really been free market as with circulation falling and papers going out of business, the barrier to new entry was very high. In those outlets where there is a free market (cable news, radio, internet, book publishing) the conservatives are holding their own or more. The reason the 'or more' is that the conservative fraction of the market was so badly served by the mainstream media.
Thanks for the ping!
Although we expected to find that most media lean left, we were astounded by the degree.
I wonder if a copy of the study was sent to the White House.
"Data impossible to dispute. An excellent study to read and keep handy..."
Thanks, Tamsey!
Ping to RC and TK.
The New York Times is for liberal "intellectuals" who were educated beyond their intelligence.
Thanks for posting, Tamsey. Great news!
I hope Brit is back today. It'll be a hoot to see the expression on his face if he reports this from the "Political Grapevine."
One of the most curious and surprising statistics in all of American politics is that an overwhelming number of journalists are liberal . . .IOW, "The fox says he guards the chicken coop. Ergo, it is surprising that chickens disappear from the coop when the fox is 'on duty'."The reason this statistic is curious and surprising is that many consider the media the watchdog of government, sometimes calling it the ¡°Fourth Branch of American Government.¡± If so, it is by far the least representative of the branches.
Our greatest accomplishment as a profession is the development since World War II of a news reporting craft that is truly non-partisan, and non-ideological, and that strives to be independent of undue commercial or governmental influence....It is that legacy we must protect with our diligent stewardship. To do so means we must be aware of the energetic effort that is now underway to convince our readers that we are ideologues. It is an exercise of, in disinformation, of alarming proportions. This attempt to convince the audience of the world¡¯s most ideology-free newspapers that they¡¯re being subjected to agenda-driven news reflecting a liberal bias. I don¡¯t believe our viewers and readers will be, in the long-run, misled by those who advocate biased journalism.¡± ¨C New York Times Executive Editor Howell Raines accepting the ¡°George Beveridge Editor of the Year Award¡± at a National Press Foundation dinner shown live on C-SPAN2 February 20, 2003.when it comes to free publicity, some of the major broadcast media are simply biased in favor of the Republicans, while the rest tend to blur differences between the parties. But that¡¯s the way it is. Democrats should complain as loudly about the real conservative bias of the media as the Republicans complain about its entirely mythical bias¡ --Paul Krugman, ¡°Into the Wilderness,¡± New York Times, November 8, 2002.
"The mainstream media does not have a liberal bias. . . . ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, the New York Times, The Washington Post, Time, Newsweek and the rest -- at least try to be fair." --Al Franken. (2003, xx) Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right.
Why Broadcast Journalism is
Unnecessary and Illegitimate
Yeah, I just can't wait to throw "exp(aj + bj cm ) / ¡Æk=1J exp(ak + bk cm )" at them. Take that, Liberal scum!
Obviously that last untested theory "If the news industry is a competitive market" is wrong.The news industry is competitive only in ways which do not cut the revenue of journalism as a whole. It's perfectly fair, in that world, to try to deliver the news faster than anyone else - what is considered unethical is to select the news on the basis of what is important and true rather than on the basis of what will sell the most papers.
Ironically, what sells the most papers is reports which call the safety of the reader into question. Which, IOW, implicitly make the case that the reader would be a helpless babe in the woods if not for the fearless reporter protecting him from otherwise unsuspected dangers. Such stories are inherently anti conservative, but the conservative public as well as the liberal public can't pass by the newsstand without reading that kind of story, even as he dissects it and ultimately dismisses it.
Most welcome :-)
I thought it was significant in that it uses mathematical evidence rather than the traditional anecdotal.
You read the entire study and this is all you got out of it?
Interesting.... and a just a bit scary ;-)
Sorry, some of the links are dead [need to do some culling]. You get the idea, though.
Thank you kindly. I'm familiar with many of those fine groups and will enjoy exploring the others :-)
Agreed! The use of mathematical evidence and the academic source lend heft to the research that can't easily be dismissed.
Media bias bump.
Hope O'Reilly, Hannity et al do the same. :-)
Bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.