Most of the questions I received were in the past couple of days and almost all of them dealt with gun control. But I think what I wrote earlier today is a good response to those queries.
So let’s deal with a question (actually two questions) from Minnesota, both of which are very simple and direct: “You deal with reporters a lot. Is the media biased? Or are people on the right just whining?”
First, I’m glad that someone else posed the question, because I wouldn’t be sure whether to ask “Are the media biased” or “Is the media biased.” I’m sure there’s a Grammar Nazi out there who knows the answer.
But back to the point of this post, I think the answer to both questions is yes. Conservatives and libertarians are whining, but that’s very understandable because the press does try to help the other side. And I have several examples.
- This slanted AP story on poverty
- The Brian Ross Tea Party slur
- An example of implicit bias by USA Today
- A Reuters report on job creation and so-called stimulus
- This Washington Post story that turned a spending cut molehill into a “spending slash” mountain
- A silly assertion in the New York Times that education spending has been reduced
- Some anti-gun control messaging from the Associated Press
- A Washington post claim that Germany is fiscally conservative
But I want to emphasize a key point. Media bias very rarely involves dishonesty. Deception yes, but not inaccuracies. It’s almost always about story selection and what gets emphasized.
Even when there’s a clear-cut mistake, such as the jaw-dropping New York Times assertion about lower education spending, I suspect it’s the result of group-think rather than a deliberate decision to lie.
But there often are deliberate decisions to steer the debate in a certain direction, and I there’s a very good example in a new expose by the Daily Caller. They caught the folks at Bloomberg highlighting poll data that helped Obama and burying the results that might give aid and comfort to the GOP.
A poll conducted last week by an Iowa-based firm showed Americans are conflicted about whether or not to support raising tax rates on wealthy Americans to avert the so-called “fiscal cliff.” But that’s not how Bloomberg News, which commissioned the poll, reported the results Thursday. In a story headlined “Americans Back Obama Tax-Rate Boost Tied to Entitlements,” Bloomberg emphasized only that the poll showed most Americans support President Barack Obama’s insistence on increasing taxes for high-income earners. “A majority of Americans say President Barack Obama is right to demand that tax-rate increases for the highest earners be a precondition for a budget deal that cuts U.S. entitlement programs,” the story, written by reporter Julie Hirschfeld Davis, began. …But in the same poll, American adults were asked “whether it is better to raise the top tax rate the wealthy pay, or to limit the amount people can claim in tax breaks, such as mortgage interest and charitable contributions, so they end up paying tax on a bigger share of their income.” Fifty-two percent responded that they preferred limited tax breaks to a tax-rate hike. Only 39 percent said they would rather see tax rates on the wealthy increase. Nine percent indicated they weren’t sure. …Bloomberg mentioned the second question in the story’s 20th paragraph, and gave no indication that the results suggested support for Boehner or House Republicans.
Kudos to the Daily Caller for catching the folks at Bloomberg with the hands in the cookie jar.
Notice, though, that there are (presumably) no falsehoods or fabrications in the Bloomberg report. The bias shows up in terms of what gets prominent coverage and what gets buried.
You’ll be happy to know, by the way, that “Bloomberg News editor and political reporter Jeanne Cummings conceded to The Daily Caller that the poll’s results are apparently contradictory.”
Gee, what a big concession to fairness.
P.S. You can see a couple of good cartoons about media bias in this post, and another good one at the bottom of this post.
[…] the DC establishment. They also figured he was worth supporting because he was so reviled by the establishment media (i.e., the enemy of my enemy is my […]
[…] the DC establishment. They also figured he was worth supporting because he was so reviled by the establishment media (i.e., the enemy of my enemy is my […]
As 46 said:”What a stupid question”
[…] let’s analyze whether there is a similar problem with journalists. And we’ll start with this video from Prager […]
[…] presumably not controversial to point out that the Washington Post (like much of the media) leans to the left. Indeed, the paper’s bias has given me plenty of material over the […]
[…] presumably not controversial to point out that the Washington Post (like much of the media) leans to the left. Indeed, the paper’s bias has given me plenty of material over the […]
[…] Now it’s time to once again write about Lebanon, though maybe today’s column is actually more about media bias. […]
[…] If nothing else, an amusing example of bias from AP. […]
[…] nothing else, an amusing example of bias from […]
[…] On a separate topic, I wrote in December 2012 that the strongest evidence for media bias is which stories get covered. A perfect example is that […]
[…] On a separate topic, I wrote in December 2012 that the strongest evidence for media bias is which stories get covered. A perfect example is that […]
[…] I’ve only written one column specifically on the topic of whether the press is slanted. In that article, I pointed out that […]
[…] I’ve only written one column specifically on the topic of whether the press is slanted. In that article, I pointed out that […]
[…] the DC establishment. They also figured he was worth supporting because he was so reviled by the establishment media (i.e., the enemy of my enemy is my […]
[…] the DC establishment. They also figured he was worth supporting because he was so reviled by the establishment media (i.e., the enemy of my enemy is my […]
[…] the DC establishment. They also figured he was worth supporting because he was so reviled by the establishment media (i.e., the enemy of my enemy is my […]
Um, conservatives kick in doors, shoot dogs, brown people and kids, bully girls, bomb foreigners and loot assets until bank failures wreck the economy. Libertarian spoiler votes are in the process of vacuuming these monsters from office as an example to other violent socialists. Libertarians are NOT on “the same side” as conservative National Socialists.
[…] good because the media hates him the same way they hated Reagan. It’s certainly true that the establishment press has visceral disdain for both of them. I’ll simply point out that media hostility is a […]
[…] a great track record when its journalists try to use numbers. In other words, maybe the problem is bias rather than […]
[…] try not to get too agitated about media bias, but I sometimes get “triggered” when the deliberate inaccuracies involve economic […]
[…] Wow. University professors may be even further to the left than journalists. […]
[…] it’s quite clear that the establishment media leans to the left, I don’t get too agitated about bias. Though every so often I can’t resist the […]
[…] it’s quite clear that the establishment media leans to the left, I don’t get too agitated about bias. Though every so often I […]
[…] it’s quite clear that the establishment media leans to the left, I don’t get too agitated about bias. Though every so often I can’t resist the […]
[…] On a separate topic, I wrote in December 2012 that the strongest evidence for media bias is which stories get covered. A perfect example is that […]
[…] On a separate topic, I wrote in December 2012 that the strongest evidence for media bias is which stories get covered. A perfect example is that […]
[…] hope his political judgement is correct, though I suspect the statists (and their echo chamber in the media) would portray any effort to amend the debt limit as a sore-loser attack on […]
[…] hope his political judgement is correct, though I suspect the statists (and their echo chamber in the media) would portray any effort to amend the debt limit as a sore-loser attack on […]
[…] I conducted a test this morning on media bias. I’m still in Iceland, so I went to sleep last night long before American election results […]
[…] it’s just my own naiveté, but I’m surprised that so many journalists are one-sided partisans. They don’t write stories explaining that the government shut down because Democrats rejected […]
[…] The establishment media is very biased, largely in that they decide to cover stories that will help the left. […]
[…] The establishment media is very biased, largely in that they decide to cover stories that will help the left. […]
[…] Republicans, what I thought about Senator Jim DeMint moving over to the Heritage Foundation, the degree to which the media is biased, and if my opinions have changed on any […]
I don’t feel any buried aggression towards conservatives. Some of my best friends are conservatives.
Everette, Fox compared to all other cable news networks(outlets)? That certainly doesn’t level the playing field against the major networks, most magazines and most of the newspapers that all lean severely left.
Paul – I sense you have a little buried aggression towards conservatives. Do you believe that calling them such names is a good way to make them allies? Many conservatives are much closer to Libertarianism than regressives.
Fox News helps level the playing field. Did you know that more money is spent by advertizers for space on Fox News than all the other news outlets combined?
It’s funny that WaPo, NYT, and NPR are positioned slightly to the right of the fulcrum. Also funny is the appearance of “LIBS” on the shirt of an illiberal who is a leftist or a progressive. Why funny?
The cartoon is clearly meant to pander to rightwingers, and “LIBS” is even a rightwing pejorative. Yet most rightwing conservatives are too closedminded and too stupid to figure out on their own that leftists appropriated long ago the word liberal to disguise the radical illiberalism of leftism and progressivism. Further still, the right wing conservative is so pig headed that even when it admits what leftists did to political language, the rightwinger still refuses to stop aiding and abetting their illiberal cousins, who understand well enough the reptilian nature of rightwing talk radio and who could do a lot worse than to smother it with a crushing burden of regulations.
First, I can’t believe anyone even asks this question anymore. Media bias goes back at least to Walter Concrete and the Tet Offensive. And it’s not limited to the U.S. media, as evidenced in this wonderful little piece: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDw5a0_iFBk.
Now, the CBC later expressed ‘regret’ over the inadvertent juxtaposing of the two clips in Lawand’s report, but that in itself was BS. The report was an obvious attempt to smear Harper, and there’s no way to deny that.
Second, while technically “media” is the plural of “medium” and should take a plural verb, English usage has turned it into a singular (and the monolithic nature of the main stream media has added to that effect), so using the singular verb will only get you into trouble with the most prescriptive of grammarians.
Brent Bozell and the Media Research Center spend a lot of time trying to expose the bias in the media, and their website http://www.newsbusters.org is a great source for reading about it. And you’re right, most of the time the bias comes in the form of what gets reported.
However, I also notice a lot of bias in the WAY things get reported, including terms used (such as pro-choice vs. anti-abortion), ratios of liberals to conservatives interviewed, selective editing, etc.
Thanks for addressing this!