Help Prove The American Media Is Biased(NRR)

RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts
edited November 2006 in Strut Central
Just had a conversation with a co-worker who was bitching about two articles in the local Dallas Morning News that he perceived as "Anti-Republican".Spouted rhetoric about how all of our mainstream media is Liberal.So I'm asking the Strut to help me prove whether or not this is the case.Here's what I need.....Send me a link to ANY Anti-Democrat/Liberal stories, editorials or articles from ANY major media outlet.This is ONLY to include Network TV(ABC,NBC,CBS)on both a local or national level as well as any city's daily newspaper.No cable/pay TV, Talk Radio or fringe lunatic papers like "The Militia Messenger".I'll even send a prize to the person who posts the MOST biased story.Thanks in advance.

  Comments


  • PATXPATX 2,820 Posts
    "Do you even know what words mean?" (As Vitamin would say)


  • Well, in order to prove bias, you have to have some kind of quantifiable
    standards of bias, sort of like a checklist, or red flags any time certain
    words are used. Without any standards the only thing a person can "prove"
    is his/her own personal bias that they bring with them.

    The funny thing now is that the far-left and the far-right each think
    the major media is biased against them. The far-left thinks that the
    media is an administration lapdog, and just rolled over and did tricks
    when Dick and Rumsfailed decided it was time to attack in Iraq. On the
    other hand, the far-right thinks that the media constantly paints the
    Bush administration in a bad light, and ends up undermining national security.

    The only thing I can add to your research idea is that you should also
    consider volume and frequency, and what makes a hot "news item" in the
    first place.

    A good example would be this recent Kerry thing - this was really not news.
    He's not running for office, he's a failed presidential candidate from
    the minority party. Why then, was the major media BLANKETED with coverage
    about this for two days, when much more important things are going on?

    One might suggest an anti-Democrat leaning.

    I suggest this: whatever smells sells, and the media are DRAMA QUEENS,
    no matter the affiliation.

  • fuck, just link 'em to the fox news website. case closed.

  • motown67motown67 4,513 Posts
    I suggest this: whatever smells sells, and the media are DRAMA QUEENS,
    no matter the affiliation.

    Yes! The number one priority of media is to sell papers and get large circulations so that they can charge more for advertising. That's why the leading stories on TV are 1) Crime, 2) Natural Disasters. There's also a large propensity to report on animals (some cat got stuck on a roof during a flood, how cute!).

    After the $, I would say that most major mainstream newspapers (NY Times, Wash, Post, LA Times, etc.) did have a liberal bias. I don't think you could quantify that, but if you looked at what kind of stories they covered and the editorial pages, they were mostly liberal and Democrats. They weren't overtly biased in their day to day reporting.

    What's happened now is that the conservatives have created new media outlets such as Fox News, etc. where they are open about thier point of view and biases.

    Lost of reporters, no matter who they write for, do very basic level reporting with little background or analysis and that tends to rely on government, police, politicians, etc. as sources. Somebody got shot, they talk to the police and get the police report and summarize it. The White House had a press conference, they repeat what was said at the press conference, etc. That's why stories like Kerry get reported because lots of Republicans are talking about it, so the press follows what the elites are talking about.

    Just my 2 cents.

  • FatbackFatback 6,746 Posts
    Dude don't waste your time.

    Just the other day, I was listening to my bro-in-law go on and on about liberal bias on NPR (that he listens to everyday before switching over to Rush et al). He said the NPR reporting of the economy was not positive enough--and therefore biased against Bush's tax cuts. I pressed him a little further asking, "Are you talking about reporting on Morning Edition or All Things Considered or what?" He said, "No, I'm talking about Marketplace." I told him that was produced by American Public Media--which is different from NPR and went on the describe the differences in addition to bringing facts about Public Radio International into the discussion. He just glazed over.

    They don't give a fuck. (Both wings.)

    They a have version of reality and the whole world is gonna fit there.

    Facts don't matter.

  • FatbackFatback 6,746 Posts
    I suggest this: whatever smells sells, and the media are DRAMA QUEENS,
    no matter the affiliation.

    Yes! The number one priority of media is to sell papers and get large circulations so that they can charge more for advertising. That's why the leading stories on TV are 1) Crime, 2) Natural Disasters. There's also a large propensity to report on animals (some cat got stuck on a roof during a flood, how cute!).

    After the $, I would say that most major mainstream newspapers (NY Times, Wash, Post, LA Times, etc.) did have a liberal bias. I don't think you could quantify that, but if you looked at what kind of stories they covered and the editorial pages, they were mostly liberal and Democrats. They weren't overtly biased in their day to day reporting.

    What's happened now is that the conservatives have created new media outlets such as Fox News, etc. where they are open about thier point of view and biases.

    Lost of reporters, no matter who they write for, do very basic level reporting with little background or analysis and that tends to rely on government, police, politicians, etc. as sources. Somebody got shot, they talk to the police and get the police report and summarize it. The White House had a press conference, they repeat what was said at the press conference, etc. That's why stories like Kerry get reported because lots of Republicans are talking about it, so the press follows what the elites are talking about.

    Just my 2 cents.

    Joel, I think Rock is specifically looking at political reporting. Your points are true generally.

    Because of the importance of access, bias in political reporting shifts with power. As the GOP has moved to power, so has the mainstream political media. I'm framing the term "access" around the post-Watergate approach of sourcing in favor of research. By it very nature there with be competing interest between calling out public officials and not getting cut out of the loop. This is a serious problem right now. This is why half-asses bitches like Judith Miller got so far ahead and was then able to where that confidentiality shit on her sleeve.


  • What's happened now is that the conservatives have created new media outlets such as Fox News, etc. where they are open about thier point of view and biases.

    but they aren't though! they claim to be "fair and balanced", they would never admit a conservative bias.

  • spelunkspelunk 3,400 Posts
    Read the book "What Liberal Bias" by Eric Alterman. It will explain the phenomenon you're talking about perfectly.

    That said, the issue has much less to do with a bias of any sort, and more to do with the fact that Conservative frames and wordings have invaded the way all of us speak about and think of things. For this, read "Don't Think of an Elephant" by Cognitive Scientist George Lakoff. Really good stuff.

    The vast majority of news reporting in major media outlets has gone to shit, in large part because newspapers just aren't all that profitable anymore, and journalists don't get paid shit. At the same time, there are great public and independent sources of news and information, better than ever before. It's a tradeoff.

  • DrWuDrWu 4,021 Posts
    I would suggest that you read the first chapter of Susan Faludi's Backlash. It is a devastating critic of how the mainstream media (particularly local circulation newspapers) covers (women's) issues. She very thoughtfully outlines how the media basically latches onto what excites people and then how stories are reprinted across the country with little or no actual follow up to see how accurate they are. This does necessarily prove bias but explains how innacurate stories spread from one paper to the next. In essence she demonstrates that the press works on the urban myth system of reportage. I think you would find it interesting.

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts

  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts

    How are these "biased"???

  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts
    The recent George Allen rally episode at which a college student attempted to ask Mr. Allen some questions has been reported in a variety of ways. Most often today's casual news reader will simply look at headlines and not read any further. Below are various headlines that reported this incident. Which of these, if any, do you think are "biased" and why.

    Heckler subdued at Sen. Allen event[/b]

    Va. police remove blogger from Sen. Allen rally [/b]

    College Student Attacked By George Allen Campaign[/b]

    George Allen To Be Questioned In Assault[/b]

    Senator won't scold backers for tackling heckler[/b]

    Liberal Blogger Tries To Attack George Allen[/b]

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts

    How are these "biased"???

    Any news item that mentions John Kerry is anti-libreal. The only purpose of ever mentioning Kerry's name is to make Dems look bad.

  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts

    How are these "biased"???

    Any news item that mentions John Kerry is anti-libreal. The only purpose of ever mentioning Kerry's name is to make Dems look bad.

    LOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Guess that means any story that mentions George Bush is Anti-Republican!!!

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts

    How are these "biased"???

    Any news item that mentions John Kerry is anti-libreal. The only purpose of ever mentioning Kerry's name is to make Dems look bad.

    LOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Guess that means any story that mentions George Bush is Anti-Republican!!!


    I'm guessing that is pretty much your friends argument. What I hear is any story that mentions Iraq is anti-republican.
Sign In or Register to comment.