Liberal Bias in the Media

[Ziggy Stardust]

Professions in the media are usually more populated by left wing people because of the nature of those professions. I am willing to accept the premise that people working in the media lean more left than right and occasionally it shows in reporting. This is a passive bias. It can be present, but isn't the aim of the reporting.

The problem there is that right-wing organisations erected media with the specific aim to report from a right wing point of view which is an active bias with the premise: "We're so under represented, we have to counter weigh this with a more pronounced point of view".

Which is all fine of course and more power to them if it's a successful proposition. As long as they stop pointing fingers at the liberal media for being biased or claim their view is the non-biased one.

To chime in with the x-post, media organisation who aren't reactionary towards the left/right wing bias angle are usually biased towards easy sensationalist reporting.

 

[Frozen In Ice]

Different news sources have different biases. I wouldn't say any one bias is more represented than the other.

 

[Traitorfish]

Here's what I don't get: why is it that when academics or journalists, as a set, lean in one political direction or another it's OMG BIAS!!!, but if business owners or unionised workers do the same it's just the way of the world? Is there something about those positions that means you're supposed to spontaneously tailor yourself to some poorly-defined affirmative action program for political parties?

 

[Ergo Sum]

Liberal Arts majors would not have a job in this day and age without science and engineering majors. Case closed.

And no American would have a job without millions of Chinese workers manning industries that we don't have any more. [/pointless argument]

 

[BasketCase]

There is definitely a liberal bias in the news media.

There is also a conservative bias in the news media.

 

[downtown]

The bias in the media isn't about being liberal or conservative really. Earthling came pretty close to nailing it....the biases are twofold:

1) There is a major bias towards framing every issue as a conflict where there are 2 sides with somewhat equal weight. This is, of course, stupid...but if the AP was doing a story on the fact that the early is round, they'd interview two morons from a flat earth society.

2) There is a major bias towards economically rewarding stories. Our media market is a business, and one that is increasingly dominated by a small number of companies. As such, media outlets tend to overpressure more revenue generating stories, and are more likely to ignore stories that could damage their parent companies. Thats why we get sensationalism instead of a questioning political press.

 

[Leoreth]

Here's what I don't get: why is it that when academics or journalists, as a set, lean in one political direction or another it's OMG BIAS!!!, but if business owners or unionised workers do the same it's just the way of the world? Is there something about those positions that means you're supposed to spontaneously tailor yourself to some poorly-defined affirmative action program for political parties?

I think it's the idea that the media or academic studies should be neutral at least in their presentation of facts, and keep this separate from interpretation or commentary. That's a fair point in my opinion. If you're an interest group and thus part of the political process (that includes corporations, unions, parties, churches, foundations ...), it's fine to show your position because that's expected of you. But the media should depict this political process as neutrally as possible.

I however don't buy the American concept that you can achieve neutrality by establishing an equilibrium between journalists that extremely slant their coverage to the left or right, respectively.

 

[Tahuti]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent

 

[Traitorfish]

I think it's the idea that the media or academic studies should be neutral at least in their presentation of facts, and keep this separate from interpretation or commentary. That's a fair point in my opinion. If you're an interest group and thus part of the political process (that includes corporations, unions, parties, churches, foundations ...), it's fine to show your position because that's expected of you. But the media should depict this political process as neutrally as possible.

Oh, I don't disagree that they should be unbiased; what I don't follow is why reaching a set of conclusions that anything more than a micron off-centre is invariably assumed to represent "bias".

 

[Oruc]

Here's what I don't get: why is it that when academics or journalists, as a set, lean in one political direction or another it's OMG BIAS!!!, but if business owners or unionised workers do the same it's just the way of the world? Is there something about those positions that means you're supposed to spontaneously tailor yourself to some poorly-defined affirmative action program for political parties?

The media holds alot of sway with people.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Everyone has a bias and most people don't see any bias because the bias presented agrees with their bias, so they don't see any bias at all. The quote that "Reality has a liberal bias" shows bias right there.

This will go great with Kochman's quote. Sigged

 

[Traitorfish]

The media holds alot of sway with people.

And the sky is blue. What are you getting at?

 

[Commodore]

Here's what I don't get: why is it that when academics or journalists, as a set, lean in one political direction or another it's OMG BIAS!!!, but if business owners or unionised workers do the same it's just the way of the world? Is there something about those positions that means you're supposed to spontaneously tailor yourself to some poorly-defined affirmative action program for political parties?

Agreed. People who say academics and journalists have a liberal bias forget to consider one little thing: What if their political leanings are a result of what they have observed in their studies/research? If their political leanings have a sound basis in fact, then I don't think anyone can really accuse them of having bias.

 

[JollyRoger]

I know the media is liberal because Fox News, the Christian Broadcasting Network, the Inspiration Network, Clear Channel, Radio America, the Washington Times, the Wall Street Journal editorial page, the New York Post, National Review, The Weekly Standard, The American Spectator, Commentary, the Drudge Report, Instapundit, Powerline, David Brooks, Dinish D'Souza, David Horowitz, Ben Stein, David Frum, Bill O' Reilly, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Pat Buchanon, Rush Limbaugh, Cal Thomas, George Will, FreeRepublic, NewsMax, Townhall, Regency Publishing, Sentinel, Spence Publishing, Crown Forum, Accuracy in the Media, and the Family Research Council all told me so.

 

[useless]

B-B-But NPR

 

[Oruc]

And the sky is blue. What are you getting at?

If all the news channels you have access to are pro-Israel, they never show Israel in bad light and always show Palestinians in a bad light you wouldn't have a problem with that? (of course you wouldn't you would only have access to one side of the issue)

 

[JollyRoger]

If all the news channels you have access to are pro-Israel, they never show Israel in bad light and always show Palestinians in a bad light you wouldn't have a problem with that? (of course you wouldn't you would only have access to one side of the issue)

What issue do all media outlets cover in the same biased way?

 

[Berzerker]

Professions in the media are usually more populated by left wing people because of the nature of those professions. I am willing to accept the premise that people working in the media lean more left than right and occasionally it shows in reporting. This is a passive bias. It can be present, but isn't the aim of the reporting.

on the contrary, how do people with a bias decide what to cover as news?

 

[Theige]

on the contrary, how do people with a bias decide what to cover as news?

On the web, analytics.

 

[LucyDuke]

One way to look at is to learn who controls it through ownership



http://www.freepress.net/ownership/chart/main

Good stuff, thanks for the link.