Where does media bias begin?

Question

All of a sudden the righties are screaming that the CEO at NBC or GE (I'm confused who they blame) has the power to influence the network's messaging.

Yet all this time they deny that Rupert Murdoch has the power to create conservative bias at Fox and that bias REALLY originates with all those reporters who are registered Democrats.

Oh yeah and in the journalism schools with those wacky liberal professors.

So righties - which is it? Careful, you may end up with some discomfort caused by the cognitive dissonance of your delusions shattering.

Answer 1

Fox is a lock, stock and barrel servant of the Republican party, devoted first and foremost to electing Republicans and defeating Democrats; it’s even run by a man, Roger Ailes, who helped elect Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George Bush senior to the presidency. And yet, because it minimally adheres to certain superficial conventions, it can masquerade as a “news” outfit and enjoy all the rights that accrue to that.

The Liberal Media myth is a propaganda tool employed by conservative radio hosts, columnists and pundits as a convenient excuse why after 20 years their ideology has failed to convince the public at large, and as a memetic inocculation of the public against the evidence that the media bias is in fact a conservative one.

Not only does the liberal media claim have no basis in fact, it also does not make sense considering the issues of media ownership and influence of advertisers. Most media outlets are owned by a handful of conservative corporations and individuals, and funded by usually economically conservative advertisers who have no need for an educated, alert, independent and critical citizenry. What they need is a dumb, bored, cynical and apathetic public that has abandoned all critical faculties and is easily distracted by celebrity gossip and mindless sports games. A public that will believe anything it is told, or nothing at all, which amounts to the same end result. This pro-corporate conservative bias of the media is well-documented and shows itself in consistent under-reporting or ignoring of any information that would lead people to question the fundamental status quo.

Answer 2

good question and some great answers. jonnyxbrainless makes an important point about Murdoch - and one which most americans are probably unaware of - Murdoch has backed figures of both the so-called 'right' and the so-called 'left' of the false right-left paradigm in other countries - notably Britain where he was a major backer of Conservative Thatcher and later of Labour leader Blair. There is a NWO agenda here and therefore nobody should be surprised to realize that bias starts from the very top. It has no loyalty to either stripe - just to those who'll further the agenda.

eg. see this link form the UK's main center 'left' news paper the Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,897015,00.html

another source of manipulation ( a better term than bias IMO) are the massive monopolizing newsagencies e.g Reuters, AP etc how many journalists, editors etc trouble to research beyond what these organizations feed them?


But perhaps the real bias in the media is neither that of right or left etc, but of continuing the false right-left paradigm itself.
how many readers, editors or journalists themselves even question the accurateness of those labels in the first place?

Answer 3

The so-called "liberal media bias" is a myth created by the right to pressure the media into being more conservative. And, the media is pretty conservative. I have yet to see a study of media bias that studies what the media DOES NOT cover, rather than what it does. Keep in mind that the media is owned by big corporations and they aren't going to report anything that goes against their best interest or the best interest of their sponsors. You would think that if the media was liberal, that most radio talk shows would be liberal. Why are most of them conservative? Because the media is owned by big businesses who think that liberals are bad for business. Air America radio has been blacklisted by about 100 corporations that will not buy advertising on their shows. This list includes the United States Postal Service!!!

You remember those seven huge rock concerts that were presented by Al Gore to bring awareness to Global Warning, called "Live Earth"? That story got very little coverage in the media. I expected a lot of coverage of the event in my newspaper. The only thing they had was a picture with a caption! They didn't even have a story! When I contacted the editor of the entertainment section about it, he told me that the news editor handled it. When I complained to the news editor, he didn't even answer my emails. That's how the conservative media works.

Have you ever tried to watch the news on primetime Fox? It's practically wall-to-wall political commentary shows. And, only one of the hosts is a liberal (Alan Colmes), and he has to share his show with a conservative (Bill O'Reilly)! That's "fair and balanced" for you!

Answer 4

Great question. I am not a Republican but media bias is real. The fact is the of all the major news outlets in the U.S. are owned by TEN companies. That is very few ppl conrolling how most American recieve their news. Some of the media companies have a liberal agenda and some have a conservative agenda - either way it is very dangerous because Americans are now mostly getting a perspective of events or straight news with no balance at all. And yes Fox news is the worst of them all. The O'Reillys and Scorborough are basically paid to yell their extremely right-wing opinions without facts. The format is not news and you what they say - opinions are like butt-holes and everybody has one - so why do I give a hell about yours that I want to sit and watch it? But it all starts with ownership of the media - that is why radio sucks, news is bad, and way to many reality shows are on the airwaves. FIGHT BIG MEDIA!

Answer 5

Media bias always begins in the editorial rooms. Yes, the CEO can wield a lot of influence and step in when it seems absolutely necessary (to the CEO), but it is usually the handpicked senior editors that make the final call for what gets reported and the slant that it is presented in. I do not understand what Flavor-Aid these conservative hacks are sipping. News anchors and professional journalists, no matter what political ideology they may adhere to, do NOT have the power to integrate their own personal biases on the airwaves. Pundits and commentators, on the other hand, generally have free reign on how they present their opinion so as long as they do not anger the executives, or the FCC, in any manner. (After all, opinion is what pundits do.)

Answer 6

Once the beer-soaked masses come to realize that ALL American media gets 90% of their news from AP, this leaves them with the horrifying conclusion that the only way media can be "biased" is by what it leaves out of the tube it is sucking on from AP.

So if CNN reports on yet another massacre in an Iraqi marketplace, and Fox News shows yet another US soldier handing Ackmed a candy bar, all they are doing is cherry-picking from the same basic lump of store-bought news. Both stories are "true" as far as they go.

One might call it "discrimination" but it's hardly BIAS. You have to have intelligence and an actual opinion to have bias.

So Murdoch obviously forbids any bad news on Fox unless it is a rape, a car fire, or some black guy going beserk or a piece on unhappy lesbians.

CNN broadcasts most of that trash plus things that Murdoch forbids.

That's really the only difference.

American media is uniformly pathetic compared to the rest of the western world. Most American newspapers aren't even worth reading anymore.

Answer 7

I know you've posed an excellent question to conservatives to get them to actually DEFINE their terms in their repeated rhetoric of "liberal" media bias, but I'd also like to answer with how I think it goes down.

He who has the gold, in this case, the venue of distribution, makes the rules. IF a right wing bias in the "mainstream" media sells well enough (and it does), then the corporate management of all media will continue to keep a right wing bias on the air. The journalists themselves, I believe, while largely fancying themselves either neutral or even - laughably - liberal, follow a pack mentality. They have bought the "liberal media" rhetoric themselves and seek to prove just how "not" liberally biased they are by becoming extremely right wing biased.

All in all, however, it's about what sells and produces the highest profits for majority shareholders. Few controlling shareholders are like Rupert Murdoch, who will throw good money after bad if he has to to see his political vision through. Inevitably is the controlling shareholders of a distributor see too much drop in profit because the VIEWERS left the massive right wing bias behind, then corporate management would begrudgingly change its directions.

Keith Olbermann HAS said that he's fully aware that many individuals in corporate management of both NBC and GE can't stand his views and do not want them on the air, BUT that they will keep to the bottom line if he proves that he can drive up their advertising revenue through ratings. I agree with him. Yet, I also believe that bottom line religion goes just so far depending on the individual in senior management.

For example, I think the only reason Olbermann was ever permitted to editorialize after Katrina is because Jeff Immelt is less ideologically driven than was Jack Welch. I fully believe that Jack Welch would never have allowed the competitive profit opportunity of Olbermann's editorials to arise in the first place. Liberal editorial being so rare on cable news, it was inevitable that Olbermann's ratings would go up and I believe Welch would expected that and not placed himself in a position in which he would have had to explain to shareholders why he demanded cancellation of a show that was on the rise in ratings.

Answer 8

Actually he does(the CEO). By the way, I'm a leftie. It is important to remember, that the news media is a for profit corporation not a constitutionally bound government entity. As a corporation, they have the right to sell their product in whatever type of packaging they wish. In this case the product is news. If you observe closely you will notice that both CNN and FNN report the exact same stories. The differences are in the way certain aspects of the story are emphasized or de-emphasized.

For example: A story covered by the Associated Press concerning civilian casualties in Iraq might be covered by

CNN saying something like: Errant US missile slams into wedding recession. Father mourns as bride is buried in her wedding dress.

While a Fox News report of the same story might say. Air strike attacks suspected insurgent stronghold in response to ground based small arms fire. Reports of civilian deaths have yet to be confirmed.

Both are biased. Both are reporting what they know to be true and yet both tell two very different stories based on listener interpretation. Bottom line, you have to be smart enough to read between the lines.

Answer 9

Interesting to see how many young / dumb libs just eat up the words of their leaders. You could research media bias - if you weren't lazy and you really wanted to know. You could research the fact... yes fact that some members of the media mis-reported facts during the Vietnam war so they could help bring the war to a quicker end... they admitted later they'd done it - so that's pretty solid.

Answer 10

Media bias begins when advertisers start backing out. No matter how much media scream that they are unbiased and on the side of the truth, they still have to sell advertising spots. If the advertisers back out because of news reporting, media outfits have no recourse but to yield to their master -- money. Otherwise they'll be forced to close up and pass out resumes.