...strikes again. They figured it out.
Posted on 01/01/2006 7:05:22 AM PST by rellimpank
Professors find most media 'significantly to the left of the average U.S. voter'
People argue a lot about whether the national mainstream media is politically biased, but such arguments are often impressionistic. Earlier this month, professors Tim Groseclose of UCLA and Jeffrey Milyo of the University of Missouri published the results of an investigation using rigorous quantitative analysis
(Excerpt) Read more at rockymountainnews.com ...
And, in other news - Sunrise was at 8:03 AM today. :-)
And in other news, the sky is blue. :-)
Wow. Don't expect libs to trust their revered "scientific approach" this time. They only do this with evolution.
LOL -You can't be sure of that where I am - Haven't seen the Sun for some time and don't expect to do so for another week.
Yes and gravity is still in effect.
Well unfortuntely to many this WILL be news
Two major media outlets were to the right of the American political midpoint: The Washington Times, at 35 percent, and Fox (the nightly news with Brit Hume) at 40 percent.
Three outlets were slightly left, but still close to the center: The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, CNN NewsNight with Aaron Brown, and ABC's Good Morning America - all at 56 percent.
The majority of the media clustered in the 60 to 69 range - significantly to the left of the average U.S. voter. These outlets were (in order of increasing leftishness) ABC's World News Tonight, NBC Nightly News, USA Today, the Today show, Time, U.S. News & World Report, NPR Morning Edition, Newsweek, CBS Early Show, and The Washington Post. Every one of these outlets was further from the American political midpoint than was Fox News.
At the far left of the major media spectrum were the Los Angeles Times (70), CBS Evening News (74), The New York Times (74), and The Wall Street Journal (85). The ratings were based only on news stories, so the left-leaning opinion pages at the Los Angeles Times and right-leaning opinion pages at The Wall Street Journal had no effect.
"Mainstream" they are NOT. They are OLD MEDIA
It's evident that liberal media remains complicit with liberal's attempts to damage the Bush administration. It's appalling, especially with the CIA leaks of late.
Their demise is happening slowly but must be accelerated, and we're shooting ourselves in the foot every time we tag them with the label "Mainstream." Mainstream is one thing they certainly are not, as proven in election after election since 2000.
Why then, the insistance on crediting them with the "mainstream" tag? Are we not aware of the importance of framing the debate? It gives them far too much credit and slows their demise. They're losing circulation, losing rating points, closing bureaus. They're dieing, but too many here continue to prop up the "mainstream media" simply by identifying them as such. They are OLD MEDIA.
"OLD MEDIA" is perfect since the term differeniates them from NEW MEDIA, which is FR, the internet, radio, and non-liberal cable news, etc.
Please think twice about the subtle but important message you send every time you write "MSM." Additionally, once they are commonly thought of as OLD MEDIA, it will really tick 'em off.
I prefer "Lamestream Media", but Old Media works. I'll mix it in some.
One last thing...
The average Democrat has an 84, and then you have LAT(70), CBS(74), and the NYT(74).
Thats right, that means... the NYT & CBS are only 10 lower than the avgerage democrat.
They are QUITE LITERALLY AND FACTUALLY democrat party organs.
They are better called the RED [commie] media. We also need to reverse the colors of this red state blue state BS.
At the far left of the major media spectrum were the Los Angeles Times (70), CBS Evening News (74), The New York Times (74), and The Wall Street Journal (85). The ratings were based only on news stories, so the left-leaning opinion pages at the Los Angeles Times and right-leaning opinion pages at The Wall Street Journal had no effect.
Well the elephant in the room here is that conservative "bias" tends toward an examination of all aspects of a story, not just sorting out the "facts" that support a political viewpoint. I don't think the study controlled for that. LOL.
If you cite the conservative point of view, without sneering code words, that automatically makes you conservative, doesn't matter if you examine the liberal one as well.
[If I read those stats right...]
15% right of center
Washington Times
10% right of center
Fox/Brit Hume
4% left of center
NewsHour/Lehrer
CNN News/Aaron Brown [didn't he get canned by CNN?]
ABC Good Morning America
10-19% left of center
ABC World News Tonight
NBC Nightly News
USA Today
Today show
Time
US News & World Report
NPR Morning Edition
Newsweek
CBS Early Show
Washington Post
20% left of center
Los Angeles Times
24% left of center
CBS Evening News
New York Times
35% left of center
Wall Street Journal
...strikes again. They figured it out.
ABC GMA is only sightly left? Not in my opinion!
Lamestream obviously is a play on mainstream and the subliminal message is reinforced yet again, imho. The reference also means the criticism is coming from the "VRWC.", and critics will dismiss it.
The base line for this study still tilts liberal. You can add 10 points to the right for each tally, IMO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.