The Left-Wing Media

[JohnRich 4]

News:

Even Harvard Finds The Media Biased

Just like so many reports before it, a joint survey by the Project for Excellence in Journalism and Harvard's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy — hardly a bastion of conservative orthodoxy — found that in covering the current presidential race, the media are sympathetic to Democrats and hostile to Republicans.

Democrats are not only favored in the tone of the coverage. They get more coverage period. This is particularly evident on morning news shows, which "produced almost twice as many stories (51% to 27%) focused on Democratic candidates than on Republicans."

The most flagrant bias, however, was found in newspapers. In reviewing front-page coverage in 11 newspapers, the study found the tone positive in nearly six times as many stories about Democrats as it was negative...

Full story: Investor's Business Daily

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Bad news is good business. There has never been an unbiased media. Ever. There is too much money there to be neutral. Then there is the human factor where everyone feels the need to take a side. There have been some individuals that strove for neutrality but that's about it.

BTW, even many republicans are hostile towards republicans and vice versa. You can only screw someone over so long before they change their POV.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[Darius11 12]

When they say negative do they mean there views were shown in a negative manner or the candidates them selves were picked on? I wonder

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[AWL71 0]

It is obvious if you take a look at it objectively. And those on the left feel that the 27% we do get is far too much. That is why they are always blathering about how terrible Fox is. Fox leans to the right and they hate it.

The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

When they say negative do they mean there views were shown in a negative manner or the candidates them selves were picked on? I wonder

Read the article.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Do you consider CNN left wing? If yes, how do you explain Glen Beck?

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[idrankwhat 0]

Why is it that when I watch or listen to CONservative media that all they talk about are the Democratic candidates? Does that make FOX, Hannity and Rush a bunch of libs?

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Do you consider CNN left wing? If yes, how do you explain Glen Beck?

A token gesture?

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

It is obvious if you take a look at it objectively. And those on the left feel that the 27% we do get is far too much. That is why they are always blathering about how terrible Fox is. Fox leans to the right and they hate it.

FOX lowered the bar on valuable information and civil discourse in the mainstream media. It sold well and now others are following their lead into the gutter. That's why I can't stand FOX.
Only "right" minded people seek out misinformation.
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/international_security_bt/102.php

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Quote

Do you consider CNN left wing? If yes, how do you explain Glen Beck?

A token gesture?

Nope. A business decision.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

FOX lowered the bar on valuable information and civil discourse in the mainstream media. It sold well and now others are following their lead into the gutter. That's why I can't stand FOX.
Only "right" minded people seek out misinformation.
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/international_security_bt/102.php

Only "right" minded people seek out misinformation? That explains why CBS viewrs ran a close second Fox viewers on having misperceptions.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

It is obvious if you take a look at it objectively. And those on the left feel that the 27% we do get is far too much. That is why they are always blathering about how terrible Fox is. Fox leans to the right and they hate it.

FOX lowered the bar on valuable information and civil discourse in the mainstream media. It sold well and now others are following their lead into the gutter. That's why I can't stand FOX.
Only "right" minded people seek out misinformation.
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/international_security_bt/102.php

FOX lowered the bar? Oh, please... if the rest of the networks hadn't gone hard left, there wouldn't have been a market for FOX to fill.

As for misinformation, you may want to refer to the many Pew reports and other sources that show that FOX is actually left of center (although much closer to it than the rest).

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[masterblaster72 0]

Quote

...sources that show that FOX is actually left of center (although much closer to it than the rest).

So Fox is part of the left-wing media bias too then (unless of course the Pew reports defined Strom Thurmond as "center")!

Damn, when will we get a network that is truly "fair and balanced"??!!

Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Quote

FOX lowered the bar on valuable information and civil discourse in the mainstream media. It sold well and now others are following their lead into the gutter. That's why I can't stand FOX.
Only "right" minded people seek out misinformation.
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/international_security_bt/102.php

FOX lowered the bar? Oh, please... if the rest of the networks hadn't gone hard left, there wouldn't have been a market for FOX to fill.

The media has by NO means shifted to the left. Just the opposite. The previous post on Glenn Beck and CNN is a great example. I just recently got my satellite TV back after taking a two year break from almost all TV. When I turned on CNN for the first time I was stunned at the similarity to FOX's look. Although the lack of decent content remained the same.

Quote

As for misinformation, you may want to refer to the many Pew reports and other sources that show that FOX is actually left of center (although much closer to it than the rest).

I could always count on FOX for disinformation. I could always count on the rest (with the exception of PBS and NPR news) for a lack of information.

[Darius11 12]

Quote

Quote

When they say negative do they mean there views were shown in a negative manner or the candidates them selves were picked on? I wonder

Read the article.

I did befor i made my post

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[kallend 2,027]

Well, JR, instead of whining why not start your own right wing newspaper? It's still a Free-Country.

Then you can tap the untold millions of readers just like yourself who want to read their news with a right wing slant.

Capitalism and the free market at work

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Damn, when will we get a network that is truly "fair and balanced"??!!

You should have heard "Morning edition" on NPR yesterday. One piece started off with something like "Democrats in Congress are now accomplishing what their Republican counterparts did earlier .......................nothing!"

I laughed out loud when I heard that one

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

News:

Even Harvard Finds The Media Biased

Interesting discussion.

The Investor’s Business Daily “Editorial” - their designation - is perhaps illustrative of the value of going to the primary data and is also supportive of Carl Bernstein’s comments referenced in another thread.

The 55-page Shorenstein report on The Invisible Primary No Longer: A First Look at 2008 Presidential Campaign Coverage is more nuanced than the IBD editorial suggests.

Among the “major finding” of the report:
“Different media segments covered the election in distinct manners: Newspapers were more positive about Democrats; talk radio was more negative overall and network TV tended to spotlight the personal aspects of the candidates.”

Which illustrates what some might call ‘cherry-picking’ in the IBD editorial:
E.g, from IBD “Even talk radio, generally considered a bastion of conservatism, has been relatively rough on the GOP. On conservative shows, Obama got more favorable treatment (27.8%) than Rudy Giuliani (25%). Sen. John McCain got a 50% favorability rating while Mitt Romney led the three GOP candidates with 66.7%.”

The IBD editorial did not mention that while Hillary Clinton “received the most [coverage] (17% of the stories), though she can thank the overwhelming and largely negative attention of conservative talk radio hosts for much of the edge in total volume,” (p.2). “Clinton was the focus of nearly a third of all the campaign segments among the conservative talkers studies [Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity & Michael Savage]. Clinton is not nearly as a popular subject among liberal radio talk show hosts,” (p. 10).

The tone of coverage side bar (box) on the IBD editorial is interesting to try to reconcile with the graphic on page 12 of the report. Illustrates vividly how a single factor (i.e., overwhelming positive treatment in stories studied of Senator Obama) can skew the data when compressed: “Most of the difference in tone, however, can be attributed to the friendly coverage of Obama (47%) positive” (p.3). Note, however, “Democrat Barack Obama … enjoyed by far the most positive treatment of the major candidates during the first five months of the year – followed closely by Fred Thompson, the actor who at the time was only considering running.” (p.1).

The report does note that “Overall, Democrats also have more positive coverage than republicans (35% of stories vs. 26%), while Republicans received more negative coverage than Democrats (35% vs. 26%). For both parties, a plurality of stories, 39%, were [sic] neutral or balanced,” [emphasis mine] (p.12).

The largest percentage – most stories – weren’t bias in any direction.

Pages 11-13 of the report go into how tone was extremely candidate-dependent.
Furthermore, the report notes that “the tone of coverage may also mirror the fact that Republican voters in polls express greater dissatisfaction with their candidate than do Democrats” (p. 14, w/reference to Pew poll, Sept07, “the survey found that 64% of the Democratic voters’ impression of Democratic candidates was excellent/good, while 49% of republican votes’ impression of Republican candidates was excellent/good.” So the overall tone of media coverage reflects - very roughly – the overall view of self-designated partisans about their candidates. I would be more concerned if the media was presenting a “tone” that did *not* take the opinion of the electorate into account; obviously that should not be the only factor in media presentation.

Heck, I’d like to see more critical analysis and less ‘fluff.’

And that was another major finding of the report, which didn’t make it in the IBD editorial (that’s okay – that’s why it’s an editorial fundraising, (emphasis nerdgirl) tactics and polling (63% of stories)” was “at sharp variance with what the public says it wants from campaign reporting” (p. 2). The polled public wanted more coverage of (1) position on issues (77%), (2) candidate’s debates (57%), (3) candidate’s personal backgrounds & experiences (55%), (4) candidates who are not front runners (55%), & (5) sources of candidates; campaign money (55%) (p.2).

-------------------

Otoh, if one accepts that the media is biased to one perspective, is the consumer better able to apply a skeptical filter to what is presented?

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Do you consider CNN left wing? If yes, how do you explain Glen Beck?

Glen Beck is an interesting individual. He is right wing no doubt but, he does not hold to the right talking points. He has put out blistering comments about Bush (and on the topic cited he was correct too)

I really do not know how to explain him. He is worth listening to

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

...sources that show that FOX is actually left of center (although much closer to it than the rest).

So Fox is part of the left-wing media bias too then (unless of course the Pew reports defined Strom Thurmond as "center")!

Damn, when will we get a network that is truly "fair and balanced"??!!

According to the report on media bias FOX is center to center left. Surprised me

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Capitalism and the free market at work

I does work well. Just look how Air America did

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Do you consider CNN left wing? If yes, how do you explain Glen Beck?

Glenn Beck is on Headline News, the main "journalistic" arm of CNN is CNN.

It's good you found that diamond in the rough. Beck is quite insightful, and very entertaining. Ever listen to his radio show? That's where he's really in his element. Halloween was especially interesting...he told lots of scary tales...really...like the non-political type...

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Capitalism and the free market at work

I does work well. Just look how Air America did

So stop the whining and open your own radio station.

I can see it now, "Through the Looking Glass" - a daily commentary on world affairs by Marc Rush.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

I can see it now, "Through the Looking Glass" - a daily commentary on world affairs by Marc Rush.

Hmmm .... how about the Rushmc & Kallend nightly radio commentary on politics, culture, and skydiving?

You could even do a round table inviting other regulars to speak?

I would definitely listen in!
VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[Tink1717 2]

Don't you worry none. FOX news and the Washington Times aren't going away anytime soon. So you can sleep well in the knowledge that you can get news that fits your individual bias any time you want it.

Skydivers don't knock on Death's door. They ring the bell and runaway... It really pisses him off.
-The World Famous Tink. (I never heard of you either!!)
AA #2069 ASA#33 POPS#8808 Swooo 1717