Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Harvard Study Confirms Liberal Media Bias
The Bulletin ^ | 11/07/2007 | Herb Denenberg

Posted on 11/08/2007 5:12:12 AM PST by William Tell 2

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

1 posted on 11/08/2007 5:12:15 AM PST by William Tell 2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

Interesting use of paragraphs.


2 posted on 11/08/2007 5:13:54 AM PST by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

Damn liberals stole the Paragraph breaks too - bastards!


3 posted on 11/08/2007 5:15:12 AM PST by PaForBush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos
Interesting use of paragraphs.

That was my thought. Got a headache trying to read it...

4 posted on 11/08/2007 5:18:42 AM PST by tips up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PaForBush
Damn liberals stole the Paragraph breaks too - bastards!

That is funny! LOL.

5 posted on 11/08/2007 5:20:19 AM PST by txlurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2
An important study has found that if you rely solely on the mainstream media for your news and information, you've been conned and may well have voted for the wrong candidates for the wrong reasons.

"Even Harvard Finds the Media Biased." Yes, Investor's Business Daily (IBD), a financial newspaper, hit it out of the park with that headline and the story on this study, which it summarized as follows: "The debate is over. A consensus has been reached. On global warming? No, on how Democrats are favored on television, radio and in the newspapers."

IBD was too polite to also point out that Harvard is one of the centers of the left-wing liberalism, so when it admits to media bias in favor of Democrats, that carries extra weight. And here's something else that proves the point of the story: how the mainstream media blacked out the story, which runs contrary to one of its basic tenets that denies the liberal bias in the media.

IBD also did not point out that this pro-Democrat bias is just a marker for many other kinds of bias. As this column has often pointed out, the mainstream media has a whole panoply of biases that includes its anti-Republican bias, anti-conservative bias, anti-military bias, anti-law-enforcement bias, anti-religion bias and many more.

Finally, the IBD failed to point out how dangerous this bias is and how it seriously distorts the real world in the eyes of the majority of Americans who rely on it for their news and information. The bias gives the Democrat Party and its candidates an obvious advantage at the polls. It transmits a false picture of public opinion and voter sentiment to our legislators and public officials, what's going on in the war against terror, the impact of the surge in Iraq and the dangers of Islamofascism. The bias transmits a false image of about everything except perhaps what appears on the sports pages. It makes it difficult and sometimes impossible for American citizens to perform their civic duties.

The study examined 1,742 campaign stories appearing between January and May 2007 in 48 news outlets, including print, online, network television, cable television and radio.

Consider a few of the revealing statistics from this report, a joint survey of the project for Excellence in Journalism and Harvard's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Pubic Policy:

* The morning news shows produced twice as many stories on Democrats as Republicans (51 percent to 27 percent).

* Sen. Barack Obama's (D-Ill.) front page coverage was 70 percent positive and 9 percent negative. Sen. Hillary Clinton's (D-N.Y.) was 61 percent positive and 13 percent negative. In contrast, for Republicans the tone was positive in only about 25 percent of stories and was negative in 40 percent of stories.

* PBS, another bastion of biased journalism, produced no stories of a positive nature on Republicans.

* CNN programming cast a negative light on Republican candidates by a margin of three-to-one. CNN's coverage of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was 63 percent negative while Mr. Obama's was only 8 percent negative.

* Liberal talk radio's stories on Rudy Giuliani (R-N.Y.), Mr. McCain and Mitt Romney (R- Mass.) were 100 percent negative, while those on Sen. Obama and John Edwards (D-N.C.) were 100 percent positive. No wonder liberal talk radio is failing; you'd find more honesty in Mafia commercials. No such wild bias showed up in conservative talk radio, which showed more signs of honest journalism than its liberal competitors. For example, the liberal Mr. Obama actually got more positive coverage than Mr. Giuliani, the Republican (27.8 percent vs. 25 percent) on conservative talk radio.

* NPR, a leader in bias even among the biased mainstream media outlets, produced stories that were more than seven times more positive than negative on Democrats (41 percent positive vs. 6 percent negative). Stories about Mr. Obama were 61 percent positive and none were negative (the rest were neutral). NPR does fewer stories on Republicans than Democrats, and stories on Republicans are also shorter than those on Democrats.

In other words, the mainstream media (which is the subject of most of the survey) not only gives out biased and distorted information but also gives out information of little help to the public trying to make intelligent decisions about candidates. Almost all the stories are about the game of politics - such matters as polling, advertising, tactics and fundraising. The important stories such as candidates' positions, background and record are downplayed or virtually ignored.

Editor & Publisher, the magazine of the newspaper industry, pointed out, "Researchers found that most voters are not getting the coverage they want, citing another survey that claims most citizens want more coverage of issues and candidates' history." Yet, only 1 percent of stories examined the candidate's past public performance, perhaps the most important consideration in deciding what candidate to vote for. Anybody can come up with a "vision for the future" and a "platform for reform and change." But you can't come up with a new background and experience and public record.

With only 1 percent of stories on records and past performance, consider the stories on the political game - 63 percent of all campaign stories. Here's another statistic indicating how the media misses the boat on what to cover and what the public wants and needs: Only 12 percent of the stories were framed in a way to show how the political subject under discussion might affect citizens. In contrast, 86 percent of the stories focused on matters that by and large impacted only the parties and the candidates.

During the period of the study, the campaign was the second-most covered story. The most-covered story was the war in Iraq. And if from this study you conclude the media screwed up campaign reporting, you haven't seen anything compared to how it botched and distorted reporting on the war in Iraq and the resulting national debate.

There are many other studies confirming the anti-Republican, anti-conservative, pro-Democratic, pro-liberal bias of mainstream media. Among them are Journalistic Fraud by Bob Kohn, The Media Elite by Stanley Rothman and Robert Lichter and Bernard Goldberg's two books, Bias and Arrogance. An encouraging development is that the left-tilting newspapers are rapidly losing circulation, and the public is catching on to the fact that the mainstream media can simply no longer be trusted and should best be avoided.
6 posted on 11/08/2007 5:21:04 AM PST by chrisser
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

Maybe the MSM should just admit it and get on with their brain washing of the sheeple.


7 posted on 11/08/2007 5:22:32 AM PST by SWEETSUNNYSOUTH (Help stamp out liberalism!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2
Harvard Study Confirms Liberal Media Bias

No!!

I'm am truly shocked!!

8 posted on 11/08/2007 5:23:21 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Temple Owl

ping


9 posted on 11/08/2007 5:24:32 AM PST by Tribune7 (Dems want to rob from the poor to give to the rich)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

Next they’re going to tell us Water is Wet??
Liberalism has become the Establishment and we are Anti-establishment.

Pray for W and Our Victorious Troops


10 posted on 11/08/2007 5:27:27 AM PST by bray (Think "Betray U.S." Think Democrat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos
Reformatted using paragraphs.

An important study has found that if you rely solely on the mainstream media for your news and information, you've been conned and may well have voted for the wrong candidates for the wrong reasons.

"Even Harvard Finds the Media Biased." Yes, Investor's Business Daily (IBD), a financial newspaper, hit it out of the park with that headline and the story on this study, which it summarized as follows: "The debate is over. A consensus has been reached. On global warming? No, on how Democrats are favored on television, radio and in the newspapers."

IBD was too polite to also point out that Harvard is one of the centers of the left-wing liberalism, so when it admits to media bias in favor of Democrats, that carries extra weight. And here's something else that proves the point of the story: how the mainstream media blacked out the story, which runs contrary to one of its basic tenets that denies the liberal bias in the media.

IBD also did not point out that this pro-Democrat bias is just a marker for many other kinds of bias. As this column has often pointed out, the mainstream media has a whole panoply of biases that includes its anti-Republican bias, anti-conservative bias, anti-military bias, anti-law-enforcement bias, anti-religion bias and many more.

Finally, the IBD failed to point out how dangerous this bias is and how it seriously distorts the real world in the eyes of the majority of Americans who rely on it for their news and information. The bias gives the Democrat Party and its candidates an obvious advantage at the polls. It transmits a false picture of public opinion and voter sentiment to our legislators and public officials, what's going on in the war against terror, the impact of the surge in Iraq and the dangers of Islamofascism. The bias transmits a false image of about everything except perhaps what appears on the sports pages. It makes it difficult and sometimes impossible for American citizens to perform their civic duties.

The study examined 1,742 campaign stories appearing between January and May 2007 in 48 news outlets, including print, online, network television, cable television and radio.

Consider a few of the revealing statistics from this report, a joint survey of the project for Excellence in Journalism and Harvard's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Pubic Policy:

* The morning news shows produced twice as many stories on Democrats as Republicans (51 percent to 27 percent).

* Sen. Barack Obama's (D-Ill.) front page coverage was 70 percent positive and 9 percent negative. Sen. Hillary Clinton's (D-N.Y.) was 61 percent positive and 13 percent negative. In contrast, for Republicans the tone was positive in only about 25 percent of stories and was negative in 40 percent of stories.

* PBS, another bastion of biased journalism, produced no stories of a positive nature on Republicans.

* CNN programming cast a negative light on Republican candidates by a margin of three-to-one. CNN's coverage of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was 63 percent negative while Mr. Obama's was only 8 percent negative.

* Liberal talk radio's stories on Rudy Giuliani (R-N.Y.), Mr. McCain and Mitt Romney (R- Mass.) were 100 percent negative, while those on Sen. Obama and John Edwards (D-N.C.) were 100 percent positive. No wonder liberal talk radio is failing; you'd find more honesty in Mafia commercials. No such wild bias showed up in conservative talk radio, which showed more signs of honest journalism than its liberal competitors. For example, the liberal Mr. Obama actually got more positive coverage than Mr. Giuliani, the Republican (27.8 percent vs. 25 percent) on conservative talk radio.

* NPR, a leader in bias even among the biased mainstream media outlets, produced stories that were more than seven times more positive than negative on Democrats (41 percent positive vs. 6 percent negative). Stories about Mr. Obama were 61 percent positive and none were negative (the rest were neutral). NPR does fewer stories on Republicans than Democrats, and stories on Republicans are also shorter than those on Democrats.

In other words, the mainstream media (which is the subject of most of the survey) not only gives out biased and distorted information but also gives out information of little help to the public trying to make intelligent decisions about candidates. Almost all the stories are about the game of politics - such matters as polling, advertising, tactics and fundraising. The important stories such as candidates' positions, background and record are downplayed or virtually ignored.

Editor & Publisher, the magazine of the newspaper industry, pointed out, "Researchers found that most voters are not getting the coverage they want, citing another survey that claims most citizens want more coverage of issues and candidates' history." Yet, only 1 percent of stories examined the candidate's past public performance, perhaps the most important consideration in deciding what candidate to vote for. Anybody can come up with a "vision for the future" and a "platform for reform and change." But you can't come up with a new background and experience and public record.

With only 1 percent of stories on records and past performance, consider the stories on the political game - 63 percent of all campaign stories. Here's another statistic indicating how the media misses the boat on what to cover and what the public wants and needs: Only 12 percent of the stories were framed in a way to show how the political subject under discussion might affect citizens. In contrast, 86 percent of the stories focused on matters that by and large impacted only the parties and the candidates.

During the period of the study, the campaign was the second-most covered story. The most-covered story was the war in Iraq. And if from this study you conclude the media screwed up campaign reporting, you haven't seen anything compared to how it botched and distorted reporting on the war in Iraq and the resulting national debate.

There are many other studies confirming the anti-Republican, anti-conservative, pro-Democratic, pro-liberal bias of mainstream media. Among them are Journalistic Fraud by Bob Kohn, The Media Elite by Stanley Rothman and Robert Lichter and Bernard Goldberg's two books, Bias and Arrogance. An encouraging development is that the left-tilting newspapers are rapidly losing circulation, and the public is catching on to the fact that the mainstream media can simply no longer be trusted and should best be avoided.

11 posted on 11/08/2007 5:27:43 AM PST by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

Ouch!

I need asprin. Formatting error?


12 posted on 11/08/2007 5:28:23 AM PST by Tenacious 1 (The earth is getting Warmer! It ain't my fault. Let's boycott Mother Nature!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

In other breaking new: Sun rises in the east.

13 posted on 11/08/2007 5:28:56 AM PST by MrEdd (Ron Paul is Ralph Nader for the right...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chrisser

Thanks for the paragraphs- otherwise I wouldn’t have read the piece:)

In light of MSNBC’s recent public admission they are left-leaning- this will simply verify what WE ALL KNOW. There is no mainstream objective journalism in America.


14 posted on 11/08/2007 5:30:16 AM PST by SE Mom (Proud mom of an Iraq war combat vet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: chrisser

Thank you. :o)


15 posted on 11/08/2007 5:35:45 AM PST by Tenacious 1 (The earth is getting Warmer! It ain't my fault. Let's boycott Mother Nature!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

I will tune into CNN tonight and see what they say about this study.

I am dissappointed that Fox numbers weren’t posted. I’m curious.


16 posted on 11/08/2007 5:37:44 AM PST by Tenacious 1 (The earth is getting Warmer! It ain't my fault. Let's boycott Mother Nature!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

My eyes! they bleed!


17 posted on 11/08/2007 5:50:15 AM PST by Malsua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2
Harvard Study: Sun Hot!
18 posted on 11/08/2007 5:52:39 AM PST by BallyBill (Serial Hit-N-Run poster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

And in other news: Other Harvard research found that the sun came up this morning.


19 posted on 11/08/2007 5:53:41 AM PST by Clay Moore ("My daddy says I'm this close to living in the yard." Ralph Wiggum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2
I've always hated the media's "coverage" of important political races as horse races. They would breathlessly announce how such and such candidates were doing pollwise or how they were being perceived by the voters. Rarely would they discuss the issues the candidates were touting.

And speaking of NPR I had the misfortune at work this past week to have to listen to NPR because it was the only station (well, other than rap) that I could get on my MP3. The main story I heard was a gush story about Che Guevarra and how he's still a very important figure by some columnist from the Village Voice. And a parting shot by one of NPR's announcing team that made fun of Republicans. So much for no bias at NPR.

20 posted on 11/08/2007 6:05:26 AM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos
Interesting use of paragraphs.

Paragraphs? We don't need no steeenkin paragraphs.

21 posted on 11/08/2007 6:12:02 AM PST by dearolddad (Opinions are like rectums: everybody has one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos

I am printing out this article and giving a photocopy of it to all of my seniors in American Literature Advanced Comp. II. They are about to start research papers on the Civil Rights Movement.


22 posted on 11/08/2007 6:18:55 AM PST by goodwithagun (My gun has killed less people than Ted Kennedy's car.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

Truly shocking. Not.


23 posted on 11/08/2007 6:20:06 AM PST by Lucas McCain (The day may come when the courage of men will fail, but not this day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chrisser
An encouraging development is that the left-tilting newspapers are rapidly losing circulation, and the public is catching on to the fact that the mainstream media can simply no longer be trusted and should best be avoided.

Great summary.

24 posted on 11/08/2007 6:28:10 AM PST by BluH2o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: chrisser

There is a place in heaven for you.

Thanks for your effort!


25 posted on 11/08/2007 6:30:40 AM PST by pilipo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

While there isn’t any doubt about the Drive-by Media being a bunch of commie pinkos, why do believe anything coming out of Harvard?

I think we need a “Captain Obvious” here...


26 posted on 11/08/2007 6:36:49 AM PST by Little Ray (Rudy Guiliani: If his wives can't trust him, why should we?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

We used to joke about going to the beach to watch the sun rise...when I lived on the West Coast. It was a useful drunk test. If someone agreed that it was a cool idea, you know they’d had too much to drink.


27 posted on 11/08/2007 6:50:03 AM PST by Disambiguator (Political Correctness is criminal insanity writ large.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray
I have a theory why liberals shun religion, conservatism, etc. and grasp onto the most ridiculous ideas on earth.
Since liberals are die-cast believers in Darwin's theory about evolution, when they get older and are exposed to the reality of life, that God is real and everything he created is in fact a masterful work of genius totally beyond the comprehension of the human mind...such a confrontation between fact and fiction (where they came from fiction) must be extremely distressing. I know it is anecdotal, but almost every liberal I have met is a miserable wasteland with no soul and trapped in a shell of deceit!
28 posted on 11/08/2007 7:30:17 AM PST by Stayfree (*************************Get your FLUSH HILLARY T-shirt at FLUSH HILLARY.com!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

Paragraphs are friends to readers!

When I have some time, I may reformat it for you.


29 posted on 11/08/2007 9:15:01 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chrisser

Thanks for reposting it.

BTW, anyone seen the MIT study that clarifies Hilary’s latest “solution” to energy? According to an MIT study it will cost us 25% MORE and not solve the energy issue.


30 posted on 11/08/2007 9:17:26 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

Where is Captian Obvious when you need him???


31 posted on 11/08/2007 9:26:26 AM PST by Mack the knife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nmh

Link to original at IBD with paragraph breaks included!!!!

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=278808786575124


32 posted on 11/08/2007 9:43:42 AM PST by Iron Munro (Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress; but I repeat myself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

Thanks again!


33 posted on 11/08/2007 9:48:05 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

btt


34 posted on 11/08/2007 2:35:17 PM PST by Cacique (quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat ( Islamia Delenda Est ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rawhide
In other words, the mainstream media (which is the subject of most of the survey) not only gives out biased and distorted information but also gives out information of little help to the public trying to make intelligent decisions about candidates. Almost all the stories are about the game of politics - such matters as polling, advertising, tactics and fundraising. The important stories such as candidates' positions, background and record are downplayed or virtually ignored.

When you throw in Hollywood, random "arts" groups, creepy "popular" culture (who's the ho"), it's flat out amazing that any Republican has ever been elected.

35 posted on 11/08/2007 2:40:15 PM PST by GOPJ ( What's important is NOT who consumes the apples, but who owns the orchard - Buchanan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: nmh
...anyone seen the MIT study that clarifies Hilary’s latest “solution” to energy? According to an MIT study it will cost us 25% MORE and not solve the energy issue.

When you find that study, please PING me... Or better yet, post it for all of us.

36 posted on 11/08/2007 2:50:47 PM PST by GOPJ ( What's important is NOT who consumes the apples, but who owns the orchard - Buchanan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

Hey William, can you try and split this thing up into a more reader friendly posting???


37 posted on 11/08/2007 2:54:18 PM PST by Lord_Baltar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Disambiguator

I used to live on the west coast; In Florida you can watch it rise or set from the beach. In certain parts, all you have to do is turn your seat around. :)


38 posted on 11/08/2007 3:13:41 PM PST by AFreeBird (Will NOT vote for Rudy. <--- notice the period)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Milhous; abb; PajamaTruthMafia; knews_hound; Grampa Dave; martin_fierro; Liz; norwaypinesavage; ...

ping

**
“Even Harvard Finds the Media Biased.” Yes, Investor’s Business Daily (IBD), a financial newspaper, hit it out of the park with that headline and the story on this study, which it summarized as follows: “The debate is over. A consensus has been reached. On global warming? No, on how Democrats are favored on television, radio and in the newspapers.”

IBD was too polite to also point out that Harvard is one of the centers of the left-wing liberalism, so when it admits to media bias in favor of Democrats, that carries extra weight. And here’s something else that proves the point of the story: how the mainstream media blacked out the story, which runs contrary to one of its basic tenets that denies the liberal bias in the media.


39 posted on 11/08/2007 8:00:10 PM PST by GOPJ ( What's important is NOT who consumes the apples, but who owns the orchard - Buchanan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GOPJ

Harvard-PEJ study proves media bias, essentially accuses Old Media of fraud. Why aren’t Old Media leaders defending themselves? 11/2/07

Posted by Steve Boriss in Bias.
trackback

In most industries, if a new study came out proving a company had made false claims about their product that harmed the public, we know exactly what would happen. The company would immediately seek public exposure to defend itself vigorously, or announce they were investigating the charges, or apologize profusely while proclaiming that such a thing would never happen again. Yet, Investors Business Daily reports that newspapers and network TV news have been caught making false claims about their objectivity, prompting — nothing — no news industry reaction at all. A joint survey by two institutions revered by journalists, Harvard’s Joan Shorenstein Center and the Project for Excellence in Journalism, proved that newspaper and network TV coverage of the current presidential race has been overwhelmingly sympathetic to Democrats and hostile to Republicans. In newspapers, the ratio of positive to negative stories about Democrats was more than 5-to-1, while for Republicans negative stories outnumbered positive ones by 50%. On network evening news, twice as many stories about Democrats were positive, while twice as many stories about Republicans were negative. Democrats also get more coverage overall.

The fact that not a single one of these news enterprises has stepped forward to defend its behavior, announce an investigation, or apologize speaks ill of their leadership, who can justifiably be accused of either lack of courage, lack of integrity, or both. Lack of courage, because they might fear business losses from admitting to the public that they have been misleading them about the quality of their news product. Lack of integrity, because they allow this deceit to continue and fail to insist that their newsrooms report on corruption within their own industry as they would on others. Journalism as a discipline has a crisis of leadership and it is contributing to its demise.

40 posted on 11/08/2007 8:58:56 PM PST by Milhous (Gn 22:17 your descendants shall take possession of the gates of their enemies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

If liberals love Rudy Giuliani so much, why are liberal talk radio’s stories on him 100 percent negative?


41 posted on 11/08/2007 9:17:53 PM PST by Chunga (Fred Thompson '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Milhous
Journalism as a discipline has a crisis of leadership and it is contributing to its demise.

"Journalism", as a discipline died long ago. It has been replaced by "Advocacy Journalism", also known as "Propaganda". The very term "Advocacy Journalism" is at best, a complete oxymoron, as a "Journalist" is presumed to be impartial, presenting merely the facts, and *not* supporting one side, or another.

Any "journalist", who has been steeped in the fraudulent culture of "advocacy journalism", which comprises approximately 99% of the "professional journalists" touting themselves as such, today, are complete and utter frauds...

the infowarrior

42 posted on 11/08/2007 10:07:03 PM PST by infowarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

Here is the original study:
http://www.journalism.org/node/8187

and a PDF of the entire study, including the data:
http://www.journalism.org/files/The%20Early%20Campaign%20FINAL_0.pdf

Some interesting data here. I’m convinced that MSNBC’s numbers ranking Republicans more favorable than Fox did are due to their relatively more common citation of Rudy.


43 posted on 11/09/2007 2:04:26 AM PST by AFPhys ((.Praying for President Bush, our troops, their families, and all my American neighbors..))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Milhous
The fact that not a single one of these news enterprises has stepped forward to defend its behavior, announce an investigation, or apologize speaks ill of their leadership, who can justifiably be accused of either lack of courage, lack of integrity, or both. Lack of courage, because they might fear business losses from admitting to the public that they have been misleading them about the quality of their news product. Lack of integrity, because they allow this deceit to continue and fail to insist that their newsrooms report on corruption within their own industry as they would on others. Journalism as a discipline has a crisis of leadership and it is contributing to its demise.

Group-think. Blindingly stupid group-think. There's no other answer.

44 posted on 11/09/2007 5:26:24 AM PST by GOPJ ( What's important is NOT who consumes the apples, but who owns the orchard - Buchanan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; Arthur Wildfire! March; Berosus; bigheadfred; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; Delacon; ...

Note: this topic is from November 8, 2007. Thanks William Tell 2.
45 posted on 12/31/2010 7:19:47 AM PST by SunkenCiv (The 2nd Amendment follows right behind the 1st because some people are hard of hearing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

thanks for the link! saved me from having to hunt it down myself.


46 posted on 12/31/2010 7:36:46 AM PST by catnipman (Cat Nipman: Made from the right stuff!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2
do I really have to say it???

47 posted on 12/31/2010 7:39:35 AM PST by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

The MSM is the greatest threat to our freedom, but nothing will be done to change this.

If there were ever going to be a revolt that effort would best be targeted at the MSM.

If America, a documented center-right country, were given a true Free Press with some balance then there there would never be a move to the Left to “Nationalize” our Freedoms - ever.


48 posted on 12/31/2010 7:44:18 AM PST by R0CK3T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

Strange coming from a libtard-ridden institution..... =.=


49 posted on 12/31/2010 8:29:38 AM PST by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

I barely have high school, but I bet I could go for a 4.0 at Harvard.......


50 posted on 12/31/2010 9:10:27 AM PST by Quickgun (As a former fetus, I'm opposed to abortion. Mamas don't let your cowboys grow up to be babies..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson