I was a news producer for some time. That meant that i was responsible for choosing which news stories would appear in the newscast, in what order and how much time and attention to allot them. This power gives plenty of opportunity to demonstrate bias if the producer is so inclined.
Shodans point about labels is a good one as well. The following point does not include soundbites from news sources. I’m talking about the words written by and for the newscasters and reporters themselves. You hear the words “conservative” and “right wing” as descriptors quite often. When was the last time you heard the words “liberal” or “left wing” on a network newscast?
Basically what he says is that it has to be on a newscast (i.e. not opinion shows or editorials; he may even limit it to the 6:00 Brit Hume, but I don’t think so) and that has to be something open-and-shut, such as misrepresenting facts or misquoting people (i.e. not “he had a snarky tone in his voice.”)
I report that senator X is being investigated for ethics violations; I do not mention that senator Y is too, nor do I mention it when X is exonerated.
I report that X is “under fire from supporters of cat-juggling;” I do not mention that the vast majority of cat-jugglers don’t care, or that other cat-juggling groups in fact support X.
I report on the negative consequences of X’s policy; I do not report on it’s positive consequences or on the fact that his rival Y’s alternative policy is equally flawed.
I report that Y is attacking X’s policy; I do not report that Y proposed a similar solution back when he was in X’s position, or that in fact Y has not offered any solution to the problem at all.
I report potentially controversial comments coming from X; I do not report them from Y.
I report anything coming from “voices on capital hill” or suchlike without naming them.
Do you see a bias? I do.
But not necessarily. There could be reasons that a story makes the news that do not involve bias. Out of curiosity, what reasons did you use to make story decisions? Did your politics ever factor into it? How about other producers?
This is just speculation on my part, but the left groups are much less united politically and less likely to identify themselves as left or right. “Liberal” has also taken on a much more negative connotation of late. A good example would be the ads from the last election referring to Kerry as “too liberal for America” or something to that effect. Noone has ever used the term “liberal media” in a positive light.
Furt, the absences I was referring to were those of studies by think tanks. It was in response to Evil One’s post answering my question. I will say again that I find it a bit silly to read bias into the lack of something when there are far more logical assumptions to be made. Just because somebody doesn’t comment on your new hair cut doesn’t automatically mean that they hate you.
If there are any less fuzzy cites on liberal bias and NPR, I would like to look at them.
I hear the word “leftist” as a descriptor quite often (and always in a derogatory sense). When was the last time you heard the word “rightist” on a network newscast?
And as long as furt is bringing up omissions as an example of media bias, I’ll just toss out one example that’s been bugging me lately…
And the omission? The simple fact that the term “nuclear option” was first coined by the Republicans, not the Democrats (Trent Lott, in particular).
The only reason for this bit of revisionist historical backpedaling is because the Republicans finally realized that the term “nuclear option” wasn’t going down well with the populace – whereupon they began an effort to start (mis)attributing the phrase as a Democrat-created smear.
And the oh-so-biased “liberal” media is playing right along…
Watch what IWT and CTV do to get started and take notes. Maybe Reason magazine or the Cato Institute would get behind such a project. I suppose a Libertarian news network would not be averse to selling advertising time. (Unlike IWT, where the very idea raises cognitive dissonance.)
That they are right of center, by this measure. Which, as far as I can tell, nobody is disputing. What seems to be less acceptable is that NPR and CBS and so forth are left of center by the same measure.
And I’ve raised questions regarding the cite you provided which for the most part have gone unanswered. I’ve you care to respond to them or provide another cite I would be glad to give it an honest read.
FYI, I’m only defending NPR. I can’t stand television news.
How useful can it really be to say that something is left or right of this measure’s “center”, when that “center” is to the right of both Drudge and the WSJ?
This raises another good question. How are we to determine the slant of a news broadcast when we’ve completely buggered any and all honest perception of what “center” is?
Bias is actually pretty far down the list of factors when it comes to story selection. You have management looking over your shoulder so you can’t go too far down that road, even if you wanted to. However, the further left (or right) the newsroom culture is, the more bias will creep in.
Story selection is a fluid process. You have to keep in mind the demographics and estimated interests of your viewers, current local, national and world events, stories that flow together and a whole host of other factors.
