Gender: Male Location: between apathy and indifference
The myth of the Liberal media bias
I’ve sad it before and I’ll say it again, I'm sick of hearing about liberal bias in the press. Recently this issue has been brought up again in a few threads by people who don’t take the time to either remove their heads from their conservative arses, or who dare not investigate anything for themselves, but just rather listen to what they are told.
The idea that the U.S. has a "liberal media" began with a book called The Media Elite, by S. Robert Lichter, Stanley Rothman and Linda Lichter. This was back in the 80’s and people refused to let it go, especially conservative pundits and their sheep.
In a not so recent post I used the example of press coverage during the Bush/Gore election that the “liberal media bias” train of thought was just a myth. Here were the facts that I posted. The following is a sample of 3000 articles written about the candidates and the breakdown was thus:
Positive Gore 13% Bush 24%
Neutral Gore 31% Bush 27%
Negative Gore 56% Bush 49%
(numbers taken from the Pew Charitable Trust Project for Excellence in Journalism, based at the Columbia School of Journalism and is a non partisan body)
So there the media showed a little more love to G.W. than Gore, hardly a smart move by a liberal media. But that wasn’t enough, people still ***** about it, so here are more facts to chew on.
If you do a nexus search regarding Total Number of Think Tank Citations in Major Newspapers and Radio during 1995 you’d come up with the following answer:
Conservative 7792
Progressive 1152
More recently David Croteau of Virginia Commonwealth University distributed questionnaires to journalists who cover national politics and/or economic policy. His questionnaires went to 78 national news organizations, including ABC News /ABC Radio, Associated Press /AP Broadcast News, CNN, NBC News, New York Times, Time, USA Today/USA Weekend and the Wall Street Journal.
The 141 journalists and bureau chiefs were questioned:
Q#22. On social issues, how would you characterize your political orientation?
Left 30%
Center 57%
Right 9%
Other 5%
Q#23. On economic issues, how would you characterize your political orientation?
Left 11%
Center 64%
Right 19%
Other 5%
I think that shows a more “centered” media than a liberally biased one.
But more so than the journalists and bureau chiefs, it is the owners of the corporations that own the media that dictate the “flavour” or direction that their organization will take. We see far more conservative pundits like Pat Buchanan, Fred Barnes, John McLaughlin, David Gergen, Robert Novak, William F. Buckley, Jr., George Will, William Safire, Cal Thomas, Jonathon Alter, Joe Klein, Robert J. Samuelson, James Kilpatrick and Rush Limbaugh than liberal pundits.
Conservatives promote the myth that the media in the US has a decided liberal slant. By continually doing that it raises public skepticism about liberal news stories, hides conservative bias when it appears. The likes of Ann Coulter and Bill O’Rielly have made a career of this.
William Kristol (a GOP strategist) even admitted, "I admit it: the liberal media were never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures."
Pat Buchanan once stated, "The truth is, I've gotten fairer, more comprehensive coverage of my ideas than I ever imagined I would receive." He further conceded: "I've gotten balanced coverage and broad coverage -- all we could have asked… For heaven sakes, we kid about the liberal media, but every Republican on earth does that." (for both Kristol’s and Buchanan’s comments see Norman Solomon, "Politics: What is Disinformation?" San Francisco Bay Guardian, August 8, 1996.)
I don't ask you to be a democrat or a liberal. I am neither, I rather like to think of myself as an independent. All I ask is that before you start spewing party rhetoric that you investigate what you are saying, and for a few of you, perhaps pull your head out of your arse.
Sorry for the long rant, I know no one will read it but I had to get it out of my system.
__________________ "I made a typo bif deal" - JacopeX
Last edited by KharmaDog on Mar 8th, 2005 at 03:18 PM
'bias liberal media' is just a blanket statement used by right wingers in an attempt to discredit all media (accept for fox of coarse).
rather than do research, and explore the validity of what is reported,
its much easier to pigeonhole and play strawman tactics:
"the media is just a bunch of tree hugging terrorist loving blah blah blah blah derpity derp derp"
__________________ "His signature loud high-energy approach to pitching an array of products and beard has gained [Billy] Mays a substantial amount of recognition."
on a side issue...what i find highly ironic and bizzare is that the left attempt to smear the right with claims of being unaccepting of certain things be they religious or social beliefs...yet the people who portray the most vitriolic hatred is the left because they are utterly unaccepting of anyone elses opinions but their own
Gender: Male Location: between apathy and indifference
The funny thing is when I substitute the word left for right in the above statement:
on a side issue...what i find highly ironic and bizzare is that the right attempt to smear the left with claims of being unaccepting of certain things be they religious or social beliefs...yet the people who portray the most vitriolic hatred is the right because they are utterly unaccepting of anyone elses opinions but their own
It makes more sense.
__________________ "I made a typo bif deal" - JacopeX
funny that...i dont see anyone from the right calling people
from the other thread...i believe the term was...moronic...
thats the kind of acceptance the world needs isnt it?
and it is more of a bigger deal when the left preach acceptance as the bastion of social values...then demonise anyone who dares not agree with their opinion
i constantly hear the terms used by left wing political commentators such as "xenophobic" "racist"
what i fail to see is the justification for this in so called "Right wing" media
regardless...a healthy balance of opinions are needed to get to the truth of the stories and we can only accept the fact that media portrays things to suit their political agenda...who wouldn't
the initial post is also obviously applicable to the american media...its a different issue here in the UK
for those who dont have access to cable or satallite television are subjected to news from 5 main channels
the bbc...a sterling reputation for being unbiased but changed under the guidance of greg dyke...the former director general...
they pushed a slightly anti war stance despite being funded by public money through the tv liscence...after a knuckle wrapping they changed back to their unbiased stance more or less
itv news....more anti war...good reporting however
channel 4 news...heavily anti war and very liberalist channel in general...not just in news broadcasting
channel 5 news...posts the extremes of both sides of the political centre in an attempt to be controvertial...usually fails miseralby
once again i cant speak for american media so i have to take what yo u say to have some truth...obviously someone else will have another opinion and probably statistics to back up theirs as well
some people argue that you can turn to the net for more of a balanced view...i think not...what the net is good for is getting to the visceral edge of news that mainstream broadcasters cant or dont publish or broadcast
lets examine the realities of the situation in the world today
the media makes its money by intruding on peoples lives whether they are wanted or not
the fact is that conservative governments would prefer to restrict the freedom of the media and are constantly taking steps to do so
where as a left agenda tends to allow more personal freedoms as well as media freedom
now you can argue til your blue in the face about the issue that most people who own and control media are conservative....but if there is one thing that talks more than political belief...its cold hard cash
the media moguls are masters at balancing the bungs to the right wing governments to get tax breaks...or pandering to the liberal governments to get more freedoms to print more trash about celebrities that the general population hoover up and thus making them a big pile of dosh
Exactly, there is no such thing as liberal bias. Magazines like that promote democracy, but vote republican for the money, everyone knows. Liberals don't even come into it, all they want is the best from both sides, which is what everyone should be like.
__________________ "His signature loud high-energy approach to pitching an array of products and beard has gained [Billy] Mays a substantial amount of recognition."
__________________ "His signature loud high-energy approach to pitching an array of products and beard has gained [Billy] Mays a substantial amount of recognition."
Yeah i guess im one of those people who hasnt taken the time to remove my conservative head from me arse-
But i still think its true- the Dan Rather things is proof of it- and also, I was watching the news a couple days ago and they were listing death counts for things in iraq.
They listed the number of US troops killed and wounded and ally death counts too- they also listed how many iraqi civilians that have been killed- but they didnt list the amount of insurgents killed- i wonder why?
It can't be because they don't know exactly how many are dead because they said that the civilian death count was a rough estimation.
I think they just don't want to admit any good going on in Iraq.
__________________
"Jesus also thought that non-believers should be stoned"------Alliance
KMC Community Forums
Mar 8th, 2005 03:16 PM
ahhhh so it is actually the LIBERALS who are intolerant!!!! 
