the only studies that have actualy shown a real liberal bias were incredibly borked. In reality the media is biased towards 'offical sources' like the government, think tanks, and against actually reporting and investigation. They like what they can authoritatively copy and paste and put out as news, and that in itself tends to put their report in line with entrenched power, i.e. the conservative 'viewpoint'
the only studies that have actualy shown a real liberal bias were incredibly borked. In reality the media is biased towards 'offical sources' like the government, think tanks, and against actually reporting and investigation. They like what they can authoritatively copy and paste and put out as news, and that in itself tends to put their report in line with entrenched power, i.e. the conservative 'viewpoint'
I would hope that they would ask bush more tough questions than clinton, considering the current situtation. The degree of difficulty of questions really doesn't show much about the bias of the questoner, as much as the important of the issues for which that persoan is acountable for.
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
Go visit any journalism school in the country, then say the media does not have a liberial bias.
I was the only conservative out of 130 students.
I was the only conservative out of 130 students.
a search of these forums on media bias would yield plenty of threads with lots of links.
The one that is in the front of my mind judged the liberal/conservative ness of each paper by how often congressional representatives references a particular source and then extapolated from their, and the wall street journal with its far right opinion page somehow came out as the most liberal source, and several prominent organization's were rated so far off from their percieved/anticipated values that the study authors simply removed them from the data.
My contradictory evidence is from some of the studies that are cited in the article, go back and read them yourself. The study that mentioned all the programs were left of center but FOX news also mentioned in the same study that the difference was very slight and that they were above all pretty centrist.
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
I reread the article and study summaries...can only find data showing fairly significant bias. Please quote or link to the study you're talking about. Also, on what basis would you disregard the results of all the other studies?
Here's the problem with right wing dingbats. Even if they supposedly show that 1) republicans get less coverages and/or 2) republicans get worst coverage, I HAVE YET TO SEE ANY EVIDENCE THAT REPUBLICANS DON'T DESERVE WORST COVERAGE.
Where does this assumption come from that republicans and democrats are equally likely to do bad things? For example, we have the republicans scandals of the last 7 years.
The whole "the media is out to get us" phenomenon started with watergate. Now, is that a bad thing? Didn't watergate deserve attention? Iran contra?
On the otherhand, did clinton's blowjob deserve so much attention?
Thanks for wasting everybody's time. The media currently is slightly right wing biased.
Where does this assumption come from that republicans and democrats are equally likely to do bad things? For example, we have the republicans scandals of the last 7 years.
The whole "the media is out to get us" phenomenon started with watergate. Now, is that a bad thing? Didn't watergate deserve attention? Iran contra?
On the otherhand, did clinton's blowjob deserve so much attention?
Thanks for wasting everybody's time. The media currently is slightly right wing biased.
So you believe that you are completely incapable of removing your conservative bias from any type of news report or story that you might write so that everyone else must be as weak as you are?
That's not really a very strong personal argument.
Here you go.
All you really need to do is read the conclusion. In effect it says that while media bias is real, it happens to fall somewhere around the area of a conservative Democrat. (Joe Lieberman is used as an example). If news broadcasts are biased as far to the left as Joe Lieberman, that's not very biased. That was my point. Not that it doesn't exist, but that it's not nearly what people think it is.
In addition, as mentioned by others the other studies mentioned there are either examinations of partisan affiliation of journalists (of which there is no evidence of a causative link between journalistic partisan preference and biased coverage that I'm aware of) and snapshots taken of specific time periods that were particularly disadvantageous to Republicans. (Again, who is surprised nobody wants to cover the Republican candidates? Even Republicans don't like them).
So... well... yeah. Some bias? Sure, the evidence seems to support it. Anywhere close to the level of bias that people routinely trot out? I don't see it.
Journalists are generally liberal, their editors and publishers are generally conservative. WHy does nobody focus on the latter aspect ? It's really just a corrupt republican party blaming the messenger for their corruption.
eits
Lifer
whoa... totally uncool.
definitely wrong of a news correspondent to call any head of state by anything other than their title and/or name. that's just uncalled for. i can't believe she called bush a monkey on national television... i mean, it doesn't upset me or anything, because i fucking hate the guy, but wow... unacceptable for a media correspondent. totally unprofessional.
i felt really embarrassed for her.
edit: she even mispronounced angela merkel's name. i hope she gets canned.
eits
Lifer
How many difficult questions does the press ask President Bush? Very, very few. When has he ever had a real press conference anyway ? And I don't mean with Jeff Gannon. He usually gives a prepared speech, and then runs away without answering any questions.
I'm glad you brought up the Tonight show, that's where Jay Leno let Arnold announce his candidacy for the recall election on national tv, and then wouldn't give equal time to the democrat.
Also, Oprah had Bush on with his wife before the last election, and asked nothing but softball questions, a huge pr gift to Bush.
Liberal bias my ass.
fallout man
Golden Member
- Nov 20, 2007
- 1,787
- 1
- 0
The biggest affront to the intelligence, dignity, and the well-being of us as citizens in the last eight years has been the way in which we've all swallowed one particular Rovian machination bait-hook-and-sinker without even blinking.
What I'm talking about is the blatant bifurcation of the citizenry based on their political, religious, and social views. Yes, in the past of this country have been periods of the passionate "Democrat" and the passionate "Republican," if you will. Today, however, the words "left" and "right" are used as a demeaning insult. Which one is meant to be insulting depends on what you read. There are two common groups which see enemies, villany, and conspiracy theories coming only from "the other" to their opposite. Those two groups are your political operatives, and your schizophrenics.
Take any Drudgereport news link with a comment blog. Read down, and feel free to CTRL-F for "right wingnuts," "righties," "repugs," "libs," "lefty," or "you liberals." Every one of those posts, irrespective of which side it portrays as the antagonist, makes me puke a little.
The silent majority, which is happy somewhere in the middle of the political spectrum, has not been staying in the middle and impartial to political hackery. This impartial majority, whom we depend on to make rational and critical votes--the "REAL" votes--is shrinking. This is because it's very easy and convenient to fall into the trap. As humans, we are very comfortable taking sides. We are very comfortable associating ourselves with a group.
The more you enhance the contrast between the perceived "left" and the perceived "right" in politics, media, and even entertainment, the more people will be compelled to choose a side and stick with it despite not being a complete and honest convert to the viewpoints they vote for and speak about.
This absolutely human trait plays right into the deliciously successful plan for winning the last two elections:
1. Don't bother trying to win-over all of the voters in every district.*
2. Give your political/religious "base" a lathery rub-down and plenty of lip-service, so that they are a solid vote you can count on.
3. Scare, intimidate, and hoodwink the shit out of the swing voters, and pray that you barely scrape by in enough states to win the electoral college votes.
4. Profit.
*You will still profit if you don't get the popular vote. Heckuva job!
This right vs. left bullshit discussion makes me personally ill, and it's killing America. I feel competent enough to determine on my own whether the source is biased. The moment you elect yourself to tell others that the bias is blatantly evident, you perpetuate the entire cycle of making me puke a little. Please, kindly, stop it.
What I'm talking about is the blatant bifurcation of the citizenry based on their political, religious, and social views. Yes, in the past of this country have been periods of the passionate "Democrat" and the passionate "Republican," if you will. Today, however, the words "left" and "right" are used as a demeaning insult. Which one is meant to be insulting depends on what you read. There are two common groups which see enemies, villany, and conspiracy theories coming only from "the other" to their opposite. Those two groups are your political operatives, and your schizophrenics.
Take any Drudgereport news link with a comment blog. Read down, and feel free to CTRL-F for "right wingnuts," "righties," "repugs," "libs," "lefty," or "you liberals." Every one of those posts, irrespective of which side it portrays as the antagonist, makes me puke a little.
The silent majority, which is happy somewhere in the middle of the political spectrum, has not been staying in the middle and impartial to political hackery. This impartial majority, whom we depend on to make rational and critical votes--the "REAL" votes--is shrinking. This is because it's very easy and convenient to fall into the trap. As humans, we are very comfortable taking sides. We are very comfortable associating ourselves with a group.
The more you enhance the contrast between the perceived "left" and the perceived "right" in politics, media, and even entertainment, the more people will be compelled to choose a side and stick with it despite not being a complete and honest convert to the viewpoints they vote for and speak about.
This absolutely human trait plays right into the deliciously successful plan for winning the last two elections:
1. Don't bother trying to win-over all of the voters in every district.*
2. Give your political/religious "base" a lathery rub-down and plenty of lip-service, so that they are a solid vote you can count on.
3. Scare, intimidate, and hoodwink the shit out of the swing voters, and pray that you barely scrape by in enough states to win the electoral college votes.
4. Profit.
*You will still profit if you don't get the popular vote. Heckuva job!
This right vs. left bullshit discussion makes me personally ill, and it's killing America. I feel competent enough to determine on my own whether the source is biased. The moment you elect yourself to tell others that the bias is blatantly evident, you perpetuate the entire cycle of making me puke a little. Please, kindly, stop it.
BoomerD
No Lifer
- Feb 26, 2006
- 66,269
- 14,692
- 146
Anyone else remember the Clinton administration complaining about the right-wing media back during that administration?
I keep wondering when they fired all the right-wingers and replaced them with the dreaded libruls...
I suspect that the media (for the most part) is pretty middle-of-the-road with a few exceptions to either side...and the conservatives being heavy on the talk-radio side.
I keep wondering when they fired all the right-wingers and replaced them with the dreaded libruls...
I suspect that the media (for the most part) is pretty middle-of-the-road with a few exceptions to either side...and the conservatives being heavy on the talk-radio side.
3chordcharlie
Diamond Member
- Mar 30, 2004
- 9,859
- 1
- 81
More to the point, visit any *school and then say the Republican party will regularly have about 50% support in the nation.
People's views change, and they usually lean towards 'tax cuts' the first time someone gets a real paycheque.
As far as bias in the media, there's a lot of smoke being blown around, but doing a short-term study in the middle of a controversial administration is pretty stupid. Everyone is biased, and there's no reason to assume it evens out, but the metrics in these studies are awful, and reality doesn't match the study.
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
Your link gives me an 'Access Denied' message. Anyway...I'm glad that we can at least agree that there's some degree of liberal media bias...at this point I think it's pointless to argue subjectives..."not very biased" vs. significant bias as the studies cited suggest.
You suggest that these studies may be skewed as they were "snapshots taken of specific time periods that were particularly disadvantageous to Republicans". I'm open to you providing evidence that supports this possiblility...however, you may be hard pressed to find snapshots taken of specific time periods that were particularly advantageous to Republicans...I think there was a 2 week window back in the 80's
.But hey...I really appreciate your comments and the way you handle yourself. Please fix the link as I would definitely like to read the study. Thanks.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter