Fox News, Empirically the place to go for fair and balanced election coverage

As a consumer of news, CNN, Fox, MSNBC and such, I am often taken aback by the hatred and the accusations made against Fox.

As it turns out, their election coverage is the fairest:

On MSNBC over 70% of the McCain stories were Negative versus only 12% Negative stories about Obama.

Fox News had 40% negativity for McCain and 40% for Obama.
CNN was 60% negative for McCain and 39% Negative for Obama.
The overrall media had 59% negative stories about McCain and only 29% negative about Obama.

On the postive side Fox News was 22% positive on McCain versus 25% positive on Obama.
Fox news is demonstrating a slight bias in favor of Obama, yet nevertheless, as measured in terms of evenhandedness of coverage Fox News has empirically been found to be more fair and balanced than either CNN, MSNBC, and the overrall media in terms of election coverage.
Glad we could clear that up.

a parody thread should include a link…

Forget it, Scylla. Around here Fox News is sneered at, proof of non-bias notwithstanding. You might as well ask Hentor to have a polite tea party with Sarah Palin.

Nonsense. Liberals are fair-minded and rational people. When confronted with facts that contradict their beliefs, they are unfailingly quick and courteous in acknowledging their mistakes and correcting their viewpoints.

Yes, I’m glad you cleared up that the Project for Excellence in Journalism is funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts, a conservative organization.

Just like conservatives.

Or you could read newspapers.

([taken out of context, but, hey! it’s your cite, Scylla )

.

Just to be fair and balanced. :slight_smile:

From Scylla’s citation:

So, among the standard broadcast media, Fox remains a slanted source while the elderly standby groups are actually neutral.

  • ::: shrug ::: *

I’ll be gald when all these pissing contests move on to some other topic.

Thank goodness- at long last, someone has done a survey about media bias! Surely this will end all arguments forever.

While it’s generally considered “negative” to say, “Yo, McCain, you’re losing!” he’s still losing. There really isn’t a positive way to say that he’s trailing, that people despise Palin, and that a number of prominent conservatives have backed Obama.

Reality can have a negative slant. You should see the way they talk about typhus!

In three days we’ll move on to the topic of which side stole the election. Feel better now, do you? :smiley:

It’s interesting, they say that, but their data suggests otherwise.

NBC was 54% negative on McCain versus 20% negative on Obama.

So? If you have evidence that this has created a bias that leads them to distort facts, then please show it.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1072 Here is a Fair analysis of Fox guests. Lean to the right a mere 8 to 1. Fox fans want that 1 out of there.

Wouldn’t this tend to indicate bias only if there were precisely the same amount of actual negative and positive stories about McCain and Obama (and their campaigns) to report on?

I’m not saying there is or isn’t, i’m just thinking that surely that’s a factor that needs to be taken into account. Balanced reporting doesn’t necessarily indicate fairness or accuracy.

You don’t have the moveon.org analysis?

Echoing jsgoddess, your interpretation is bizarre. Why should we expect stories to be equally negative and positive about both candidates? I guess you could call that “balanced”, but depending on the facts, it may be highly undesirable.

ETA: And now echoing Revenant Threshold as well…

The fact that it’s a conservative organization is enough for them to dismiss it. Hell, once I posted a link to some info and it got dismissed because the site had American flags at the top.

I don’t know if I count (seeing as I’m not a major player in the liberal handbook here), but I watch Fox News from time to time and don’t have any huge problem with them. I think they can be biased and I also think they* can shoot straight*. Pretty much like anyone else is capable of doing.

Do I think some specific representatives (or their programs) of their station can be biased? Sure. But, I feel that way about anything. I think you have to do independent analysis and then make a determination individually, on a case-by-case basis.