Reasoned discourse on liberal bias in the media
There is no liberal bias in the media. Okay, maybe that is not reasoned discourse.
Maybe we should consult a different source.
The liberal media watchdog group has released a study saying syndicated columnists are dominated by conservatives.
From Editor & Publisher: His group found that 60 percent of the daily newspapers print more conservative syndicated columnists each week than liberals. Twenty percent of the papers are dominated by liberals and 20 percent are balanced. Media Matters had no information on local columnists.
The study also did not look at news decisions and placement, editorials, editorial cartoons, guest columnists, space used for liberal/conservative issues or letters to the editor. It also failed to survey the leanings of newsroom employees.
Nice try, Media Matters, but your study is like judging a vehicle by its tires.
It seems safe to say that liberals are mad as hell and they are not going to take it anymore. Do you think they hate Thomas Sowell because he is black?
September 12th, 2007 at 10:29 pm
Regardless, editorials are honest about being opinions. Even if they hire more conservative editorial columnists, that amounts to a fart in the wind compared to the clearly opinionated articles on the front page. I don’t write up editorials and post them as news… I’m honest about my biases.
And yeah, that’s like Microsoft investigating itself for anti-trust violations. hah!
September 12th, 2007 at 10:55 pm
No, they don’t hate T. Sowell because he is black. They hate him because he is usually correct, and doesn’t need their pandering and dismissive “noblesse oblige” they use to keep the darkies in their “place”.
Hey, call as I see ’em.
September 12th, 2007 at 11:03 pm
Kevin on LeanLeft posted about this earlier. This is the sorta reason I’ve given up that site — it’s ridiculous to try and debate this sorta matter when your opponent thinks that Olbermann is the only mildly-left-of-center on MSNBC.
Selection bias, weird definitions, and simple self-delusion.
When I can show the ratio of antigun to progun writings, articles, and coverage on my hands or the scale leans toward pro-gun, I’ll pay attention to this sorta spiel. When I leaf open TIME magazine toward an approving report card on the new Democratic Senate (how far to the left do you have to be to think that this Congress deserves an A on clearing out corruption, or that 2 out of 8 goals earns a B?) and see this to be the more conservative side of the magazine (they did get a C somewhere).
September 13th, 2007 at 1:17 am
There’s so much bias in all directions on just about every media outlet you can think of that there’s no possible way you could ever really determine which side is getting the short shrift these days. It’s not 1991 anymore and most of the carping about media bias is overblown on both sides.
But antigun media bias is pretty clear and obvious.
September 13th, 2007 at 6:34 am
Liberal “study” procedure.
A) Form a hypothesis
B) Gather data (if none is available, make data up)
C) Design “study” around data that “proves” hypothesis
D) Discard data that does not support hypothesis
E) Publish report that hysterically trumpets “SEE, I TOLD YOU SO!!!”
F) Plug ears and chant “Nah, Nah, Nah, I can’t hear your” when the flaws in study methods or data are pointed out.
G) Sit back and watch media report the results of the “study” as gospel.
September 13th, 2007 at 7:40 am
[…] Now liberals are complaining that newspapers run too many conservative columnists. […]
September 13th, 2007 at 9:41 am
I am researching firearms media bias for my masters thesis.
The matter of who controls the paper is a matter of newsroom terminology.
If you refer to the senior editors, such as managing, news, and -in-chief, then liberals are the vast majority.
If, however, you refer to the administrative management, such as publisher, ad manager, plant operations, etc., then the leanings are conservative.
In other words, if they control content they tend to be liberal, whereas the money people are conservative.
In this case, the study looked at columnists and opinion writers.
These are a strange case as they are neither news (and put a lot of effort into that distinction) nor are they management. Most editorials (as opposed to columns) are discussed, voted on, and decided by an editorial board, which is usually made up of the publisher, controller, editorial editor, editor-in-chief, and managing editor. In other words, two libs, two righties, and the editorial editor.
Now, again in this case, the editorial editor is in charge of hiring and selecting the columnists. But the publisher is generally key in selecting the editorial editor, as leaving that call to the editor-in-chief opens the door for claims of bias and a merger of newsroom and editorial.
So…. this study, as conducted, likely did find a 60% or greater conservative tilt to opinion. But, if the researcher had looked at the newsroom, I think the numbers would’ve skewed quite far the other way.
September 13th, 2007 at 9:42 am
I forgot to mention I spent the better part of a decade as an editor at a daily newspaper. On a newstaff of 120, there were three of us who knew which end of the gun the bullet came out of.
September 13th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
I believe their results.
Since they left out everything about the papers except syndicated columnists. Since the local folks, the editorial board, the editorial cartoons, etc. are all overwhelmingly left, they can afford a bit of ‘balance’.