# 'Liberal Media Bias' (in US). **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 4, 2012, 7:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788 "2012-04-04T07:32:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/81 "2012-04-05T13:48:24Z")
> [@DrFidelius](#): > > As a thought, perhaps the often repeated image of conservatives as being some sort of vile troglodyte is evidence of the “Liberal Media Bias,” as reasonable conservatives do not seem to get much press at all in the US while the noisemaking morons all seem to be repeated on every news and comedy show. So Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are also part of the liberal media conspiracy? Oh, wait, they’re not _media_, they’re _entertainment_. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/82 "2012-04-05T13:53:17Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > The problem is that after more than 100 years of evidence one has to protest and ask the question: Where is the controversy? > > In the case of evolution it is really clear that the nanosecond one claims that there is a controversy you are already showing gross bias, and not in favor of science. > > As talkorigins put it recently: “sure you want to teach the controversy, so where is it?” It has been years since people like Behe had published his “definitive” book against evolution and a look at the academic sources showed how pathetic his footprint or influence in academia was really after 10 years, but this is not an exercise on popularity, research would by now had supported many of his ideas against evolution, but the only thing we got was even more evidence that evolution was and is real. What you aren’t grasping is that many people think global warming is a real phenomenon, the reason for it and the fixes are where the bias comes into play. There isn’t enough ‘fact’ to eliminate the bias some people will hold. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/83 "2012-04-05T13:55:25Z")
> [@BlackKnight](#): > > “Pretty factual”? What does that mean, and how does it differ from actually factual? Also, what on earth do you mean by “derivations of either”? In addition, you appear to be calling “areas of ‘not fact’”, whatever they are, biased, and not people or organizations. Normally, people or organizations of people are considered to be capable of bias, not areas or ideas themselves. > > In short, I’m having trouble making sense of your statement and am requesting clarification. You are right, the ‘facts’ are not biased. When you get into areas on subjective opinions as to the why’s it is happening or the hows to slow/stop it lead to severe bias. Is that clear? ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/84 "2012-04-05T14:00:52Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > Sure there are, they just aren’t highly touted as ‘news’. > > Facts aren’t biased to anyone, if it’s seen to be biased, then it might not be fact This is where the whole mess begins to break down, and why I’m skeptical of studies like the one **Shodan** holds up as a smoking gun. We really need to know how we’re calculating bias, and (ironically) whether it’s even possible to do so objectively. If a majority of conservatives think Obama is a Kenyan Moozlem usurper and CNN reports on the evidence to the contrary while Fox is content to Just Ask Questions, is that liberal bias on the part of CNN? If a news outlet does an analysis of the factual and historical meaning of the term “socialism” and why it doesn’t necessarily apply to every White House initiative, is that liberal bias? If NPR uncritically parrots statements released by the military about our many campaigns overseas, is that conservative bias because conservatives tend to be pro-military and interventionist, or does it toggle between liberal and conservative bias depending on whether a Democrat or Republican is President? When you look below the surface, it gets a lot more complicated. ---
**Author:** ![pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pseudotriton_ruber_ruber)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/85 "2012-04-05T14:16:02Z")
> [@DrFidelius](#): > > It seems like a varirty of tribalism. If a person strongly identified himself as a Liberal, a Democrat, or On the Left, then they are likely to demonize anyone who appears to be associated with The Other, and are unable to accept that neither the official party line nor the statements of self-proclaimed leaders hold much relevance for many individuals. > This holds true for anyone strongly invested in the other side of the aisle as well. > > As a thought, perhaps the often repeated image of conservatives as being some sort of vile troglodyte is evidence of the “Liberal Media Bias,” as reasonable conservatives do not seem to get much press at all in the US while the noisemaking morons all seem to be repeated on every news and comedy show. What exactly as a small-c conservative are you espousing that distinguishes your position from any of the worthies proudly proclaiming their capital-C Conservatism (incorporating racism, bigotry, warmongering jingoism, corruption, etc.)? Please be specific so I can understand better what you’re distinguishing between. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/86 "2012-04-05T14:19:41Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > So Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are also part of the liberal media conspiracy? Oh, wait, they’re not _media_, they’re _entertainment_. :rolleyes: I actually wouldn’t know. I believe I listened to one of Rush’s shows for about ten minutes back in the 90s, and I have never (to my knowledge) listened to Hannity at all. But, as I said, it is not the morons who are part of the “conspiracy,” their direct audience is far smaller than those reached by )what seems to be) every Liberal on the Interwebs repeating “OMG! Did you hear what Rush said!!! What a moron!!!” Frankly, no, I hadn’t heard what he said, and I really don’t care. I also don’t think it helps any to give him the attention he seems to crave. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/87 "2012-04-05T14:35:47Z")
> [@DrFidelius](#): > > But, as I said, it is not the morons who are part of the “conspiracy,” their direct audience is far smaller than those reached by )what seems to be) every Liberal on the Interwebs repeating “OMG! Did you hear what Rush said!!! What a moron!!!” So it’s Internet liberals who make elected Republican officials (and those trying to get elected) either grovel and apologize when they criticize Rush’s ideas or NOT criticize his ideas when they’re outright offensive to half the population? I mean, since we’re apparently the greatest propagators of Rush’s ideas, way more than the numbers of his audience, right? ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/88 "2012-04-05T15:00:26Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > What exactly as a small-c conservative are you espousing that distinguishes your position from any of the worthies proudly proclaiming their capital-C Conservatism (incorporating racism, bigotry, warmongering jingoism, corruption, etc.)? Please be specific so I can understand better what you’re distinguishing between. I am not sure I can, or at least not in a way you would accept or understand. I do not have any type of consistent, overarching political philosophy, and I have known personally far to many low-level politicians from both parties to have any respect for the breed. I cannot believe that they become better persons as they move up in their parties. When I do pay attention to politics, I see each party doing everything it can to block any “success” by the opposition party. Each side is more concerned with maintaining or retaining power in Washington than with doing what is best for the country. Which is usually good, since if they spend all their energies fighting each other they can do little damage to the rest of us. I try to make decisions on issues based on the issue, not on what any given party’s position is or what any given pundit may be saying. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/89 "2012-04-05T15:08:00Z")
> [@VinylTurnip](#): > > This is where the whole mess begins to break down, and why I’m skeptical of studies like the one **Shodan** holds up as a smoking gun. It would be a smoking gun if it were a good definition of “bias.” I do not think it is a good definition of bias, even in the restricted context of “media bias.” But I think it is at least somewhat objective and, if we could find a way to normalize it to remove the “american congress” aspect from it, I think it’d be an excellent start of something. Alas, I think that the right—though not necessarily **Shodan** —has a problem citing academic studies for support of any position because they’ve also quite consistently accused academia of liberal bias. Some of the more extreme elements even go further and call it _indoctrination_. This automatically calls into question any defense of the notion, which is unfortunate because if there is bias in the media we really should attempt to see why that is and whether we can or should do anything. When they then bring up how well “conservative” media outlets do, they’re media; but, when they are criticized for their actions, they stop being “media” and become “entertainment.” Well, Terry Gross and Ky Risdall are just “entertainers” and if they happen to make it _seem like_ NPR has a bias, well, that’s just like your opinion man. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/90 "2012-04-05T15:08:50Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > So it’s Internet liberals who make elected Republican officials (and those trying to get elected) either grovel and apologize when they criticize Rush’s ideas or NOT criticize his ideas when they’re outright offensive to half the population? I mean, since we’re apparently the greatest propagators of Rush’s ideas, way more than the numbers of his audience, right? As I had said, I cannot answer for what any politician may say, do, or not say. I can only speak for myself. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/91 "2012-04-05T15:17:43Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > What you aren’t grasping is that many people think global warming is a real phenomenon, the reason for it and the fixes are where the bias comes into play. > > There isn’t enough ‘fact’ to eliminate the bias some people will hold. Sorry but we have to go the real world, in the current real world the Republicans, specially their leaders, have decided that there is no problem at all, ignoring even the basic science. The blind can not lead the blind, when you take into account that baseline (continue polluting, everything will be fine) that many conservatives bring to the discussion, it is then really naive to think that good solutions can come from that crowd. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/92 "2012-04-05T15:29:01Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Sorry but we have to go the real world, in the current real world the Republicans, specially their leaders, have decided that there is no problem at all, ignoring even the basic science. The blind can not lead the blind, when you take into account that baseline (continue polluting, everything will be fine) that many conservatives bring to the discussion, it is then really naive to think that good solutions can come from that crowd. You and many others aren’t talking to the people who refuse to believe it at all though. When you start talking about pollution (and the effects thereof, and everything will be fine), you are espousing a position that cannot be factually asserted. You simply do not know enough of the hows and the whys to say that pollution is key or anything else for that matter. This is also the spot where the bias starts to come into play. That it exists in some measure is the fact, everything else can be biased. ---
**Author:** ![pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pseudotriton_ruber_ruber)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/93 "2012-04-05T15:36:20Z")
> [@DrFidelius](#): > > As I had said, I cannot answer for what any politician may say, do, or not say. I can only speak for myself. May I assume you have a blind rage about Obama’s presidency? That seems to be one common thread uniting all conservatives I know about. If so, can you tell me what specific things the Obama administration has done to make you certain to vote for his opponent in the fall? That might be a good place to start speaking for yourself. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/94 "2012-04-05T15:43:57Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > When you start talking about pollution (and the effects thereof, and everything will be fine), you are espousing a position that cannot be factually asserted. You simply do not know enough of the hows and the whys to say that pollution is key or anything else for that matter. This is also the spot where the bias starts to come into play. > > That it exists in some measure is the fact, everything else can be biased. What are you talking about? It’s quite easy to establish that the greenhouse effect is occurring, and that it has some non-zero impact on mean temperatures. It’s equally easy to establish that there is a general warming trend. I suppose you are correct that it is not easy to establish whether the two are connected, but that really doesn’t matter all that much; an increase in atmospheric CO2 is a bad thing regardless of its impact on temperature. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/95 "2012-04-05T16:03:38Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > May I assume you have a blind rage about Obama’s presidency? That seems to be one common thread uniting all conservatives I know about. If so, can you tell me what specific things the Obama administration has done to make you certain to vote for his opponent in the fall? That might be a good place to start speaking for yourself. Why would you assume that? So far, he hasn’t done that bad a job, and I cannot say I am all that impressed with what choices the Republicans seem to be brewing up. ---
**Author:** ![pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pseudotriton_ruber_ruber)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/96 "2012-04-05T16:08:09Z")
OK–by that standard, you seem like a moderate to me. I’m not sure why you’d want to affiliate yourself with the “conversative” label, since they all appear to embrace anti-rational and racist policies. What makes you a conversative, in your view? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/97 "2012-04-05T16:17:02Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > You and many others aren’t talking to the people who refuse to believe it at all though. As in the case of most countries in the developed world, there comes a time that they need to be ignored when they do not have a leg to stand on. > [@Kearsen](#): > > When you start talking about pollution (and the effects thereof, and everything will be fine), you are espousing a position that cannot be factually asserted. You simply do not know enough of the hows and the whys to say that pollution is key or anything else for that matter. This is also the spot where the bias starts to come into play. Duh, of course there is bias, but it is a bias gained by a constant denial of the facts, and this is a case where we do know who are the ones coming with the grossly unfounded bias. [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/xvMmPtEt8dc/hqdefault.jpg "8. Climate Change -- Has the Earth been cooling?") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvMmPtEt8dc) Incidentally as senator Inhofe shows, there is a connection between conservative climate change deniers and creationists, and it is affecting the education systems of several states. [http://ncse.com/news/2012/01/oklahoma-bill-attacks-evolution-climate-change-007158](http://ncse.com/news/2012/01/oklahoma-bill-attacks-evolution-climate-change-007158) ---
**Author:** ![Paranoid\_Randroid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/paranoid_randroid/32/18_2.png) [@Paranoid\_Randroid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paranoid_Randroid)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/98 "2012-04-05T16:21:33Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > OK–by that standard, you seem like a moderate to me. I’m not sure why you’d want to affiliate yourself with the “conversative” label, since they all appear to embrace anti-rational and racist policies. What makes you a conversative, in your view? Now _where_ on earth did I put those genuine Scotsmen? I’ve looked everywhere. ---
**Author:** ![jackdavinci](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackdavinci/32/3259_2.png) [@jackdavinci](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackdavinci)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/99 "2012-04-05T16:26:16Z")
I’m convinced that the underlying assumption of this question, that there is some quantifiably real phenomena identified by the terms “liberal” and “conservative”, and that real life or real people can in any way be somehow legitimately mapped along a single trajectory with these criteria as the extremes, is ridiculous. I’m likewise skeptical that one can draw a hard and fast boundary around what comprises the mainstream media. Whatever bias there is, is likely to be mostly a mixture of stated bias (mission statement) combined with business concerns (getting both sponsors and readers/viewers). It is highly doubtful there is any secret ideological bias that outweighs the other two factors. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788/100 "2012-04-05T16:56:23Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > As in the case of most countries in the developed world, there comes a time that they need to be ignored when they do not have a leg to stand on. Why ignore them when you can inform them? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-media-bias-in-us/617788.md?page=6)