Heh. Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist
While the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal is conservative, the newspaper’s news pages are liberal, even more liberal than The New York Times. The Drudge Report may have a right-wing reputation, but it leans left. Coverage by public television and radio is conservative compared to the rest of the mainstream media. Meanwhile, almost all major media outlets tilt to the left.
These are just a few of the surprising findings from a UCLA-led study, which is believed to be the first successful attempt at objectively quantifying bias in a range of media outlets and ranking them accordingly.
Interesting methodology to demonstrate things that we right-thinking people already knew.
December 20th, 2005 at 2:23 pm
So is Fox News the only channel you can trust, Pete?
This discussion has been done to death, and the final uncracked nut is always this: Journalists may be overwhelmingly liberal, but they don’t own and operate networks. That’s for the richest of the rich. How many liberal newsparper writers does one Rupert Murdoch cancel out?
December 20th, 2005 at 3:55 pm
That’s a pretty weak argument. Esp. given the following quotes:
So, Fox News was the only conservative network, but it’s one of the most centrist.
Being rich doesn’t make one conservative, by the way, and Rupert Murdoch doesn’t really cancel out any more liberal journalists than George Soros does conservative journalists.
December 20th, 2005 at 5:10 pm
I wrote a long rant here, but I’ve decided that the main flaws in the study (as described in the article) are as follows:
1) The calculation of the average ADA score as 50.1. There are an incalculable number of underlying variables controlling the average score that we are representing as “the political position of the average US voter”.
2) Using think-tank name dropping to make associations between media outlets and politicians. The sample size of 20 media outlets is too small to provide accurate statistics.
3) Media outlet reach: Newspapers such as the NYT are headquartered in major metropolises, traditionally more concerned with social programs, taxes, and other liberal issues. If they are leaning left they may simply be catering to their demographics. I realize that a paper like the NYT has nationwide circulation but thi s is still something to consider. Check their front page, they have lots of NY-specific stories. TV stations have a more nationwide reach and should hence aim for a more centrist focus.
4) Actual results from the study here ([url removed for display reasons -ph]). Table 5 shows a (perhaps not representative) sample of 8 of the media outlets in the study. Judging by the names I am guessing they are the biggest outlets sutdied. On this list, we can see each outlet’s ADA score. Notice here that Fox News Special Report is 23.7 points away from the “average” of 50.1 cited earlier in the article. The next runner up is the NYT at 14.5 points away.
I am tired of ranting for now, so here is my closing:
- This study is flawed
- Lots of journalists are liberals
- The #1 TV news channel has an extremely conservative show
- I don’t know which side’s mind control rays have more readers
December 20th, 2005 at 5:45 pm
Points, in order:
1) Irrelevant to the study as a whole, it’s simply a point of reference. Had the numbers not been adjusted, everything would’ve been slid to the left about 15 points, as best I can tell.
2) Simply saying so doesn’t make it true. 20 may be plenty depending on the size of the universe one wishes to study. Considering the number of think tanks keyed on (200), you’d have a hard time making the case that those 20 outlets were wrongly categorized. At best you can say that uncharted orgs. may be more liberal or conservative than those studied.
3) And you hit a key point on the head. If they’re catering to a liberal demographic, Daniel, that makes them liberal.
4) Check table 7 — score by citation instead of sentence. You’re either trying to discredit a study you have yet to read or you’re being highly disingenuous.
In re: your closing:
- You have yet to make anything other than an assertion that the study was biased.
- If the sentence “The #1 TV news channel has an extremely conservative show” doesn’t strike you as funny, you’ve probably already made up your mind independent of the facts.
- And we’re not talking about reach, here, we’re talking about bias. The reach shows the impact of the bias, not the extent of it.
December 20th, 2005 at 6:07 pm
You deleted the link and I just googled it at work. Too tired to google it again at home.
Didn’t mean to be disengenuous - I didn’t read the entire paper but I did scan it at work. I probably stopped after table 5.
I will yield the point that the study shows that the outlets selected are mostly liberal. I will not extrapolate that out to the perceived power of a liberal media conspiracy.
December 20th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
My bad… HTML Screwed up. Here’s the redacted link.
I don’t think it’s a conspiracy, I just think we ought to move to a system where reporters don’t pretend not to have bias, they just disclose what it is so we can all judge for ourselves.
December 20th, 2005 at 9:58 pm
I think it’s obvious that most media outlets have a liberal bias - of course, recent developements have created more conservative options, which is probably a good thing - I like to watch both to see each side make a case against the other - but one interesting question that I don’t see adressed too often is WHY most media outlets have a liberal bias- what’s the underlying cause; and what does it tell us about American society? I also doubt it’s a conspiracy - a major reason could be that news organizations developed with a desire to appeal to urban population centers (which tend to be more liberal) but I don’t think that explains the continuing trend or the near systematic presense of such a bias. The other questions are: how much of an impact does such a bias really have on society, and what should/could be done about it (and why).
I think most Americans can see the bias, choose another option if they desire, or they can watch whatever and incorporate their knowledge of bias into their interpretation of the information presented. I realize I’m being generous here, but I think it’s true to varying degrees.
The liberal bias thing is a little old, its there, OK. So now what? I think the conversation needs to be pushed into a direction that focuses more on the causes and impacts.
December 21st, 2005 at 1:27 am
yay for the liberal media!