Why are there so many more liberal news networks compared to conservative news networks?

[baydude]

CNN, NY Times, HuffPo, Wa Post, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, LA Times, and many more news networks all swing to the left. The only main stream media network that caters to conservative viewers seem to be Fox News.

According to Wikipedia, As of October 2014, Gallup polling found that 43% of Americans identified as Democrats and 39% as Republicans. Why is there such a huge gap in conservative news networks when there is only a ~4% difference between Democrats and Republicans?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I see it this way.

We live in narcissistic culture of selfies, WWWF smackdown nights, reality-TV and other phenomena. I now feel alienated by the culture of my own country. I have a vague suspicion that this somehow explains why people are blind to Trump's vanity, lack of empathy, bullying behavior, indifference to the Truth, jealousy, vindictiveness . . . . and generally a low, amoral character incapable of either wisdom or real leadership.

The idea of a "liberal" media is a myth. Whether or not there are "liberal" journalists doesn't matter. Whether or not a media source follows the concept of "objective" journalism or "advocacy" journalism does matter.

FOX's owner had bought up media throughout the world. There are several FOX channels on the tube.

The reason CNN or MSNBC appear "liberal" to FOX adherents is that they adhere to objective journalism standards. In their opinion broadcasts, they will be seen as liberally biased because they argue a common sense deviating from crude, simplistic rightist ideology.

News events either happen randomly, or they are deliberately manufactured. Either way, events that can be cross-verified are reality. If news events are simply "made up" without the event behind them, they're simply crude black propaganda -- lies.

People on the Right seize on the "opinion" and "comment" portions of broadcasting as means of identifying a channel as "liberal" or "reliable." But it really boils down to whether an opinion exhibits logical inference, or ignores additional facts that change the result of logical inference, or is simply some shell-game produced to satisfy the chicken-little desires of an audience.

Righties believe that they are smart, they are individuals, they aren't average or average-of-the-mass, and therefore -- they can't be influenced as an average or average-of-the-mass. This explains their affinity for one source or one type of source which offers confirmation and amplifies their preferred sense of what is real. It is precisely the reason those sources can indeed influence them as a group or mass. The influence requires denial. The denial results from this heightened sense of self and a narcissistic culture.

And you'll never get them to accept this, no more than you could get Trump to admit his fallibility. They think that because they're "equal," their opinions must be the only ones that merit attention, and the opinions which correspond to the crude ideology are the only right opinions. Thus, in their imaginations, they assume that some plurality of news sources that follow objective journalistic standards must be some media conspiracy bent on robbing them of their rose-tinted view of what ought to be, as opposed to what is. They especially like to cherry-pick facts, throwing out those that don't support the belief system.

This provides a basis of group behavior such that group decisions can be group mistakes. And they will never admit to making collective mistakes. You could rub their nose in in the stark reality shit, and they still won't smell it.

 

[superstition]

There are no for-profit "liberal" news entities. They're out for profit. That is inherently illiberal.

Liberalism likes to pride itself on doing right by people.

Profit-seeking is about scamming people by getting them to pay more for something than what it's worth.


So the actual question here is: How many for-profit news-entertainment entities craft their content to appeal to a liberal audience? If there are more of these entities why is that?

You should also consider the so-called "centrists" when asking your question. Also, don't forget to think about per capita basis as well as how many people are reached by specific entities. Fox News, for instance, has been the market leader, in terms of number of viewers, in television broadcast news-entertainment for a long time now. There is also the issue of talk radio.

 

[FIVR]

RT is the only true american news source today.


OP interesting you include WaPo in your list of "liberal" news sites. WSJ is also hardly "liberal". LA Times is a newspaper without much nationwide circulation, not sure why you included it. The others aren't particularly liberal either, more corporatists and CNN is about as right-leaning as any of them. You may have a point with MSNBC though.

 

[FIVR]

C'mon man, Russian Times, really?

I hate to say it but they're more accurate any AP outlet. Still I would vet whatever they say.

That's a damn sad state of affairs.

Good journalism would be appreciated right about now.

Russia Today uniquely provides an unbiased and truthful source that Americans crave. They post all the new wikileaks piped hot, straight from the SVR... I mean... straight from those patriotic american leakers. Where else would you go for the true truth you know is true?

 

[Puffnstuff]

The reason CNN or MSNBC appear "liberal" to FOX adherents is that they adhere to objective journalism standards. In their opinion broadcasts, they will be seen as liberally biased because they argue a common sense deviating from crude, simplistic rightist ideology.

Anybody who applies critical thinking in journalism and doesn't bow down to some religious organization is immediately labelled as a liberal. I find this ironic when the anchors over at Faux News dress provocatively yet are worshiped by organized religion. A professionally attired journalist from a so called liberal news outlet versus the pretty blonde lady in the low cut top and short dress? The physical evidence is just astounding and we are supposed to base decisions on facts not rhetoric. You know where we are when people call good bad and bad good....or at least you should know.

 

[kage69]

RT is the only true american news source today.

That's got to the be the stupidest thing I've read here in months, and with some of our resident trolls that's really saying something.

You are either a complete moron or a paid shill.

Unbiased? lol

 

[IronWing]

That's got to the be the stupidest thing I've read here in months, and with some of our resident trolls that's really saying something.

You are either a complete moron or a paid shill.

Unbiased? lol

He's Russian. No, he actually is Russian, and likely paid to post.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Not liberal or conservative networks, usually partisan Democrat as opposed to a partisan Republican network.

 

[IronWing]

CNN, NY Times, HuffPo, Wa Post, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, LA Times, and many more news networks all swing to the left. The only main stream media network that caters to conservative viewers seem to be Fox News.

According to Wikipedia, As of October 2014, Gallup polling found that 43% of Americans identified as Democrats and 39% as Republicans. Why is there such a huge gap in conservative news networks when there is only a ~4% difference between Democrats and Republicans?

From where you stand, these media companies appear to be left leaning. From where I stand, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, FOX, and ABC are just money grubbing sensationalists. They would set live puppies on fire on air if they thought it would sell ads. HuffPo is left of right but not terribly leftist. The NY Times is center right with the Wa Post and LA Times more centrist. The three newspapers at least try to do original research and reporting, something rare in this era of lazy media.

 

[fskimospy]

Fox news is yet just another AP news outlet with a wee bit of right English applied.

They're all false.

The best bet is local news, Liveleaks and RT. Take all with a grain of salt and make your own conclusions.

I hate to say it but that's the way it is in 2016.

Not long ago this was not the case. At this point in time it is.

I love how you're telling people that they shouldn't read AP sources because they're all 'false' and then direct people instead to a literal Russian government propaganda outlet.

 

[brycejones]

Thread title should be:

Why aren't there more news networks that tell me what I want to hear?

 

[imported_tajmahal]

From where you stand, these media companies appear to be left leaning. From where I stand, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, FOX, and ABC are just money grubbing sensationalists. They would set live puppies on fire on air if they thought it would sell ads. HuffPo is left of right but not terribly leftist. The NY Times is center right with the Wa Post and LA Times more centrist. The three newspapers at least try to do original research and reporting, something rare in this era of lazy media.

Yeah, but you're so far out in left field you're no longer in the ballpark.

 

[IronWing]

Thread title should be:

Why aren't there more news networks that tell me what I want to hear?

Yeah, but that should be a demand from all directions. Right now most of the American "news" media sucks, just really sucks. They regurgitate press releases as if that were news, no hard questions, no independent investigations, just endless blather and asinine happy head stupidity. Bunch of lazy ass Barbie and Ken dolls.

<harumph, harumph, harumph>

 

[Puffnstuff]

How true is that? Maybe they should tune into one of the many fine religious news networks and sow their faith seeds so they can reap their news stories in abundance.

 

[Sonikku]

I don't believe there is a liberal mainstream media conspiracy however if one is of the opinion that Fox News is straight down the middle unbiased journalism, I could see where one could get the impression of everything else seemingly leaning left in comparison.

 

[nakedfrog]

Yeah, but you're so far out in left field you're no longer in the ballpark.

I'm not aware of him being an extreme leftist.

 

[zinfamous]

wow, lot of new fake members telling people to start reading RT.

where the fuck have we seen this before, eh?

 

[Starbuck1975]

I see it this way.

We live in narcissistic culture of selfies, WWWF smackdown nights, reality-TV and other phenomena. I now feel alienated by the culture of my own country. I have a vague suspicion that this somehow explains why people are blind to Trump's vanity, lack of empathy, bullying behavior, indifference to the Truth, jealousy, vindictiveness . . . . and generally a low, amoral character incapable of either wisdom or real leadership.

The idea of a "liberal" media is a myth. Whether or not there are "liberal" journalists doesn't matter. Whether or not a media source follows the concept of "objective" journalism or "advocacy" journalism does matter.

FOX's owner had bought up media throughout the world. There are several FOX channels on the tube.

The reason CNN or MSNBC appear "liberal" to FOX adherents is that they adhere to objective journalism standards. In their opinion broadcasts, they will be seen as liberally biased because they argue a common sense deviating from crude, simplistic rightist ideology.

News events either happen randomly, or they are deliberately manufactured. Either way, events that can be cross-verified are reality. If news events are simply "made up" without the event behind them, they're simply crude black propaganda -- lies.

People on the Right seize on the "opinion" and "comment" portions of broadcasting as means of identifying a channel as "liberal" or "reliable." But it really boils down to whether an opinion exhibits logical inference, or ignores additional facts that change the result of logical inference, or is simply some shell-game produced to satisfy the chicken-little desires of an audience.

Righties believe that they are smart, they are individuals, they aren't average or average-of-the-mass, and therefore -- they can't be influenced as an average or average-of-the-mass. This explains their affinity for one source or one type of source which offers confirmation and amplifies their preferred sense of what is real. It is precisely the reason those sources can indeed influence them as a group or mass. The influence requires denial. The denial results from this heightened sense of self and a narcissistic culture.

And you'll never get them to accept this, no more than you could get Trump to admit his fallibility. They think that because they're "equal," their opinions must be the only ones that merit attention, and the opinions which correspond to the crude ideology are the only right opinions. Thus, in their imaginations, they assume that some plurality of news sources that follow objective journalistic standards must be some media conspiracy bent on robbing them of their rose-tinted view of what ought to be, as opposed to what is. They especially like to cherry-pick facts, throwing out those that don't support the belief system.

This provides a basis of group behavior such that group decisions can be group mistakes. And they will never admit to making collective mistakes. You could rub their nose in in the stark reality shit, and they still won't smell it.

I see it this way

Lefties believe that they are smarter and better than the "average" deplorable American -- they can't be influenced because they know better than the masses. This explains their affinity for one source or one type of source which offers confirmation and amplifies their preferred sense of what is progressive. It is precisely the reason those sources can indeed influence group think positioned as heightened intellectual awareness. The influence requires denial. The denial results from this heightened sense of superiority and an eliticist culture of speaking down to and dismissing as intellectually inferior those they disagree with.

See what I did there.

There is no left wing or right wing media. Fox News plays to one demographic. MSNBC plays to the other. CNN falls somewhere in between.

 

[realibrad]

Are we sure that the RT thing was not a joke about how close Russia and Trump are?

As for the liberal split, it has to do with how divide the party is. If you look at how people identify in the parties, the Republicans are far more unified. Something like 30% of Democrats consider themselves Moderates, and 15-20% consider themselves Conservative. That is very different from the Republican party where its something like 70% consider themselves Conservative. Different political parties with very different groups.

 

[HomerJS]

The OP's labeling of liberal vs conservative news sources is complete bullshit.

The liberal NYT broke the Hillary email story
Liberal CNN broke the treatment of Vets in the VA hospital system.

When was the last time Fox News broke a story that was highly damaging to a Republican?? I can't recall one single time.

 

[fskimospy]

People think that news which reinforces their own opinions is unbiased. News that conflicts with their opinions is often viewed as biased. Measures of political ideology have shown that conservatives have moved much farther to the right than liberals have to the left over the last 40 years or so, so it's not surprising that they tend to view the majority of news networks as liberal.

 

[Starbuck1975]

The OP's labeling of liberal vs conservative news sources is complete bullshit.

The liberal NYT broke the Hillary email story
Liberal CNN broke the treatment of Vets in the VA hospital system.

When was the last time Fox News broke a story that was highly damaging to a Republican?? I can't recall one single time.

Megyn Kelly begs to differ. Also Fox managed to offer the best moderated of the debates. What they are selling is not journalism.

I don't recall MSNBC ever doing a story damaging to Democrats but that is because MSNBC is the Fox of the left. Commentary and packaging.

The NY Times and CNN on occasion still provide true objective journalism. I would say the same for Rolling Stone were it not for their trying to push the rape culture narrative a bit too aggressively.

 

[WHAMPOM]

CNN, NY Times, HuffPo, Wa Post, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, LA Times, and many more news networks all swing to the left. The only main stream media network that caters to conservative viewers seem to be Fox News.

According to Wikipedia, As of October 2014, Gallup polling found that 43% of Americans identified as Democrats and 39% as Republicans. Why is there such a huge gap in conservative news networks when there is only a ~4% difference between Democrats and Republicans?

Cater as in misidentifying scandal committing Republicans as Democrats? That is Faux News.

 

[pauldun170]

Historically, news outlets were rooted in journalism. At least in the traditional sense. You have the natural balance of market factors (target audience) against what\how facts are reported. Older outlets still have roots in that.
Outlets that send reporters off to report in a third world country at the street level will have a different take on events than the outlet that whose reporters never leave the hotel room or only ventures out in a US convoy.

1990s saw the shift from journalism to entertainment.
Foxnews success is that it embraced News as a form of entertainment from the start and thats why it took off. FoxNews is great at narrative building and engaging the viewer.