For those who don''t believe in the Bias in MSM

[85Sooner]

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."

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=278808786575124

[SoonerStormchaser]

Insert "no ****" here.

[Scott D]

Thanks for the rescue Captain Obvious.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

Japs bomb Pearl Harbor.

[Chuck Bao]

Whew! You guys had me worried there for a sec.

Before Captain Obvious showed up, I was getting a bit concerned that you guys were actually more trusting of right wing politicians than you were of the main stream media. Oops!

[VeeJay]

Some of them will admit their bias while others, like Dan Rather, always just reported the facts.....:rolleyes:

[Scott D]

I'm waiting for the "study" that states that television salesmen steer people to certain manufacturers because it's some sort of bias and conspiracy of nonsense.

[85Sooner]

I'm waiting for the "study" that states that television salesmen steer people to certain manufacturers because it's some sort of bias and conspiracy of nonsense.


Hey we don't deny that :)

[King Crimson]

http://journalism.org/node/8187

link to 11 page findings of study. the actual study is a little more nuanced than "I was right, MSM lubs the Dems".....nor is it the only conclusion made by the study. Additionally, the study focuses on this election, it makes no universal claims (though, those are sure to follow once the study is appropriated as it has been by the ibdeditorial site above).

for instance, see overall "bias" accounted for in difference between Obama and McCain:

* Overall, Democrats also have received 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 neutral or balanced.

* Most of that difference in tone, however, can be attributed to the friendly coverage of Obama (47% positive) and the critical coverage of McCain (just 12% positive.) When those two candidates are removed from the field, the tone of coverage for the two parties is virtually identical.

* There were also distinct coverage differences in different media. Newspapers were more positive than other media about Democrats and more citizen-oriented in framing stories. Talk radio was more negative about almost every candidate than any other outlet. Network television was more focused than other media on the personal backgrounds of candidates. For all sectors, however, strategy and horse race were front and center.

I would encourage *anyone* truly interested in the media and politics and not simply partisan flamethrowing to read the entire report.

[Scott D]

Hey we don't deny that :)

it's of small comfort to the MSM that you admit to being full of nonsense.

[85Sooner]

it's of small comfort to the MSM that you admit to being full of nonsense.
Aren't we all

[Scott D]

I'm pretty sure that even willie favor is ashamed of your version of diminutive cranial tinfoil hat conspiracy theories.

[soonerloyal]

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."

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=278808786575124


At this point, the Republican Party has its trunk so far up its colective six, logic and common sense dictate looking to the other Party for some sort of improvement. It's about time the MSM started noticing many of us want a change from the "norm" we've suffered under for the past two terms.

Journalistic neutrality doesn't exist any more. It's been dead for decades. A true shame.

I'd like to read the actual article, though. The link only goes to an opinioned overview. Thanks for posting, I'm going to do a more in-depth search.

[mdklatt]

I would encourage *anyone* truly interested in the media and politics and not simply partisan flamethrowing to read the entire report.

I prefer to get all my facts from editorials so that I know what to think about them.

[85Sooner]

http://journalism.org/node/8187

I would encourage *anyone* truly interested in the media and politics and not simply partisan flamethrowing to read the entire report.


OK Published 10/29/2007
Here is the full link so you can get the full story! Hello Pot?????????
http://www.journalism.org/node/8197

[King Crimson]

OK Published 10/29/2007
Here is the full link so you can get the full story! Hello Pot?????????
http://www.journalism.org/node/8197

what is this supposed to mean?

i again emphasize that this study is specific to this election coverage.

and, if you want to generalize in the combo persecuted Pubs/scapegoat the Libz mentality, go for it. but that's not what this study is about.

again, returning to the land of "now" you have unpopular war(s) and a sitting POTUS with very low approval ratings, 3 buck a gallon gas, what do you expect? confetti?

the more interesting aspects of the report are about the front-runner coverage....which should echo across anyone's concern about media coverage and the media market whether it's ESPN blowing USC or BC or Lindsey Lohan latest rehab...

where are the issues?

if you want to keep blaming the media for everything, get a clue that it's a consumer driven model. it's the American people who drive that machine. if there weren't ratings, it wouldn't be there.

it's not mind control, it's supply and demand.

[Sooner24]

At this point, the Republican Party has its trunk so far up its colective six, logic and common sense dictate looking to the other Party for some sort of improvement. It's about time the MSM started noticing many of us want a change from the "norm" we've suffered under for the past two terms.

Journalistic neutrality doesn't exist any more. It's been dead for decades. A true shame.

I'd like to read the actual article, though. The link only goes to an opinioned overview. Thanks for posting, I'm going to do a more in-depth search.


Sorry to hear about your suffering. :(

[badger]

http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/4799/funtopicuf6.jpg