All The News That’s Fit To Skew
A new study by the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard shows, rather conclusively, that there is an enormous bias in the press. Two separate ones in fact. The media is heavily biased for Democrats and extremely biased against Republicans.
Just like so many reports before it, a joint survey by the Project for Excellence in Journalism and Harvard's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy — hardly a bastion of conservative orthodoxy — found that in covering the current presidential race, the media are sympathetic to Democrats and hostile to Republicans.
Democrats are not only favored in the tone of the coverage. They get more coverage period. This is particularly evident on morning news shows, which "produced almost twice as many stories (51% to 27%) focused on Democratic candidates than on Republicans."
The most flagrant bias, however, was found in newspapers. In reviewing front-page coverage in 11 newspapers, the study found the tone positive in nearly six times as many stories about Democrats as it was negative.
Breaking it down by candidates, the survey found that Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were the favorites. "Obama's front page coverage was 70% positive and 9% negative, and Clinton's was similarly 61% positive and 13% negative."
In stories about Republicans, on the other hand, the tone was positive in only a quarter of the stories; in four in 10 it was negative.
A lot of people have been pointing this out for a long time, of course. But these numbers indicate that things are actually getting worse. The press is also heavily focused on politics rather than policy, a sort of "inside baseball" mindset that shortchanges the public on useful information. And they wonder why people are increasingly turning their backs on traditional media.
By mockinbird, Friday, 2 November , 2007 @ 2:17 pm
This is precisely why I don’t read papers much these days, except my local Florida Times Union.
By Chris, Friday, 2 November , 2007 @ 2:36 pm
Pshaw. Everyone knows that Republicans are evil, so stories about them are bound to be negative. Democrats are far more interesting, so there have to be more stories about them. Otherwise nothing makes any sense any more.
By Mwalimu Daudi, Friday, 2 November , 2007 @ 2:46 pm
I don’t even bother with my local paper. All it does is recycle articles from the New York Times, Washington Post, and the and calls it news. They cannot be bothered to do any original reporting themselves.
At some point (soon, one hopes) it will occur to the rock-heads that run the GOP that the MSM exists solely to pamper their Democrat pets. There are alternative ways of getting the Republican message out to the public - if the GOP can overcome its phobia about crossing the MSM.
Given the fact that current GOP “leaders” like Bush seem terrified of their own shadows I am not holding my breath.
By feeblemind, Friday, 2 November , 2007 @ 4:22 pm
I have long wondered how big the percentage point swing to the right would be if we had fair reporting? And the implications for government policy?
By James, Friday, 2 November , 2007 @ 5:32 pm
>The media is heavily biased for Democrats and extremely biased against Republicans.
LOL….No. I do believe Blue gone it wrong this time; so did Havard.
It’s the other way around.
Reminds me of a story about a T.V. show called the Untouchables back in the 50’s/early60’s.
A women, claiming to be Italian, called the studio and complained that the show was displaying Italians as violent people, who killed, crippled, and blew things up. She told the produces that if they did change the character of the mobsters, she would bomb the studio.
Thumb’s up boys and girls for steroetypes, real or not.
By James, Friday, 2 November , 2007 @ 5:34 pm
oops…typo.
“gone” = “got”.
My bad.
By NortonPete, Friday, 2 November , 2007 @ 6:12 pm
One of my college roommates was a journalism major. He only wore Che Guevara tee shirts, well thats not true he also had a couple of “Off the Pig” fist shirts. We believed he was a member of the SDS underground. I’m sure he’s covering the White house now.
The news is mostly being fed to Reuters or AP from “stringers”. There is no verification of anything. Forget about Iraq, we get “casualty numbers ” with in an hour of an incident and the victims are spirited away with in minutes.
Last year we had an AP photo of a kid who shot Hogzilla. It was photo shopped and the poor animal was actually someones pet and 1/5 the claimed size.
A California newspaper has out sourced local reporting to India. Yes they are on contract to write 6 500 word newspaper articles about local news in California and the “reporters” never leave India. Jason Blair was more “real”.
Don’t believe anything you see or hear and nothing you read.
By Mwalimu Daudi, Friday, 2 November , 2007 @ 6:50 pm
I do believe Blue gone it wrong this time; so did Havard
Oh! Of course - “Havard” University, that Ivy League redoubt of fundamentalist right-wing Republican chichenhawk neocons! How silly of us! We repent!
“James”, I am curious. Is it pronounced Ha-VARD or HA-vard? And are you a graduate of “Havard” - or “Yael”?
By crosspatch, Friday, 2 November , 2007 @ 8:10 pm
Well, the people who live around there pronounce it HA-vahd. The “r” would be silent in the local New England dialect.