Linda Seebach of The Rocky Mountain News notes a study by Yale University that finds that the media really is biased to the left. (The results of that study can be found here.) The study took an objective measure of liberal versus conservative issue positions using a scale developed by Americans for Democratic Action, a liberal interest group that rates politicians on a scale of 100 (very liberal), to 0 (very conservative).
The results are predictable enough, the media is more to the left than the rest of the country. The average Democrat has an ADA score of 74.1. The New York Times scored a 67.6 and the CBS Evening News scored a 70.
Ironically enough, Fox News’ 35.6 puts it far closer to the mainstream than most any of the news outlets. For all the talk about how FNC is a GOP mouthpiece, the network goes out of their way to present liberal viewpoints. While it’s talk shows are as bad as any in the format, Special Report is often far more balanced than most of the other shows out there. While Fox News’ personalities lean to the right more than the average (which the study does show), it’s hardly any less biased than the rest of the media and generally tends to be more transparently so.
The fact is that the media, with the exception of a few outlets, leans dramatically to the left, and that shows in their reporting. The press has largely abandoned any semblance of objectivity in order to get John Kerry elected, which is why liberals calling Fox News biased is rather like the pot calling the kettle black. At the very least, the fact that an outlet like Fox News exists (and is wiping the floor with the other networks) is an example of media diversity in action – an outpost of conservatism in a sea of liberal groupthink.
Since clearly those who are better informed (journalists, teachers, professors, librarians, etc) lean so far liberal, we can therefore conclude that liberalism is the more realistic and correct position, and that conservativism is the position of ignorance.
The idea that “balanced” reporting is reporting that shows both liberal and conservative sides is a myth designed to maximise media viewership by appealing to both sides. There’s no bias in the facts, and the facts support liberalism. Conservatives live in a dream world.
It’s lunacy to assert that “balanced” journalism requires both facts and lies. Journalism is about the facts, and the facts support generally liberal conclusions in most cases.
“…those who are better informed (journalists, teachers, professors, librarians, etc)…”
This is pure opinion. It cannot be proved, except by “testing” their knowledge of “facts” and comparing different professions’ scores. And who would administer such a test and who decides what facts to include? …meaning any results would be suspect.
Here’s my opinion: teachers, professors, and journalists (who are schooled by them), tend to be lazy snobs who depend on union strong-arm tactics to force taxpayers to keep them in the manner they’ve become accustomed without regard to merit.
Well, that’s the funniest thing I’ve heard all week…
This is pure opinion.
No, it’s a priori fact. Those who inform must, necessarily, be better informed than those that they’re informing.
It’s simple logic.
As I’ve already demonstrated, the supposedly “better informed” journalists apparently didn’t know that Paul Bremer was giving a speech that was broadcast on worldwide television. They also can’t read a report that says that Iraq and al-Qaeda had longstanding ties in the Sudan, something that even the ombudsman of The New York Times took them to task for.
For a group of “better informed” people, they apparently can’t so much as get basic facts right…
Those who were better informed in the pre-civil war south were for the most part slave owners. I guess the facts just showed so well that owning slaves was right and correct.