Study: All Major News Outlets Have Left-Leaning Bias that ‘Distorts’ Minds

#1
MUR73

MUR73

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
1,384
Likes
0
#1
Interesting study that most of us already knew.

Story Highlights:

-UCLA political scientist Dr. Tim Groseclose pens new book about liberal media bias in which he has scientifically proven that mainstream outlets are biased & Liberal media bias, he says, impacts Americans’ perspectives on important issues.

-In his new book, Left Turn — How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, Groseclose not only sets out to showcase that the media are biased, but he also seeks to expose the profound influence liberal bias has had on the American public.

His Findings:

- All mainstream news outlets in the United States have a liberal bias.

- The Drudge Report is the most fair, balanced and centrist news outlet in the United States.

- Fox News’ “Special Report,” which is usually characterized as conservative, is not biased as far right as typical mainstream outlets are biased to the left.


Here is the link to the story.
UCLA Professor Tim Groseclose Finds Liberal Media Bias in Mainstream Outlets | Video | TheBlaze.com
 
Last edited:
#5
#5
How is Fox News not a major news outlet? They will tell you over and over again about their ratings dominance.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#6
#6
KiffinKiller said:
How can you scientifically prove left-leaning bias? How many beakers would you need?
Click to expand...

Maybe if you read the article you may find out, call me crazy, though. education can be cool, my friend, try it out. I thought you Liberal types were open-minded.
 
Last edited:
#7
#7
MUR73 said:
Maybe if you read the article you may find out, call me crazy, though. education can be cool, my friend, try it out.
Click to expand...

Everyone knows universities are left-wing biased. Especially California ones. Does this mean these results are equally biased and major news outlets are actually communist?
 
#8
#8
IPorange said:
Everyone knows universities are left-wing biased. Especially California ones. Does this mean these results are equally biased and major news outlets are actually communist?
Click to expand...

Ucla is very liberal
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#9
#9
IPorange said:
Everyone knows universities are left-wing biased. Especially California ones. Does this mean these results are equally biased and major news outlets are actually communist?
Click to expand...

mind = blown.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#10
#10
The Drudge Report is the most centrist in his study because it only focuses on the links, not the actual commentary by Drudge. The left of center is a reflection on the bias in the media. (per Wikipedia)
 
#15
#15
#16
#16
bham, the methodology flaws cited in your article are endemic to this kind of "research." An even more fundamental flaw is that it relies on the inherently subjective judgment of one criteria-maker to "score" the source being cited by the media story.

As I read it, they 1) took a liberal think tank's score of a politician or an expert; and then 2) tracked the number of times that politicians or experts with more liberal scores were cited relative to the number of times that politicians and experts with lower scores were cited.

The article you posted cites problems with step 2. But step 1 is of course an enormous problem. I get why they did it -- so they could claim that it wasn't based on their own subjective impressions -- and they could therefore claim that their own bias is not the foundation of it.

But that's like saying that if Chris Matthews took the Fox view of who is conservative and then ran a study of their own news stories, it would come out stilted. This is because there is an inherent bias by the rater to "reward" those he/she agrees with a higher score.

Basically, in the name of being able to deny their own bias, they used scoring that they knew going into it would help prove the conclusion they had already reached, and in fact that they knew would be even more likely to be supported based on the bias within the initial scoring.

Its a farce.

Now, I will also say that a study claiming to cite to conservative bias would likely also suffer from similar flaws. This is because no matter what source you use to label a person or a story or an opinion liberal or conservative is going to judge it from their own particular point of view.

As there is no agreed-upon "center," it stands to reason that one cannot rely on some score -- by anybody --- as accurately describing something as "liberal" or "conservative" for purposes of studying this kind of thing.
 
#17
#17
lawgator1 said:
bham, the methodology flaws cited in your article are endemic to this kind of "research." An even more fundamental flaw is that it relies on the inherently subjective judgment of one criteria-maker to "score" the source being cited by the media story.

My article? This type of research is routinely done and determined to be sufficiently rigorous to constitute "knowledge" or "fact. Whether this particular study reaches that standard I cannot say without more investigation but there is nothing uniquely biased here that doesn't appear in similar peer-reviewed publications investigating journalism.


As I read it, they 1) took a liberal think tank's score of a politician or an expert; and then 2) tracked the number of times that politicians or experts with more liberal scores were cited relative to the number of times that politicians and experts with lower scores were cited.

The article you posted cites problems with step 2. But step 1 is of course an enormous problem. I get why they did it -- so they could claim that it wasn't based on their own subjective impressions -- and they could therefore claim that their own bias is not the foundation of it.

I didn't post the article - not sure why you keep saying this.

But that's like saying that if Chris Matthews took the Fox view of who is conservative and then ran a study of their own news stories, it would come out stilted. This is because there is an inherent bias by the rater to "reward" those he/she agrees with a higher score.

Basically, in the name of being able to deny their own bias, they used scoring that they knew going into it would help prove the conclusion they had already reached, and in fact that they knew would be even more likely to be supported based on the bias within the initial scoring.

Its a farce.

It is not a farce. You may disagree with the methodology or if the findings merit the larger conclusion but the research would not have been published as it was if it were a farce or as methodologically flawed as you suggest.

Now, I will also say that a study claiming to cite to conservative bias would likely also suffer from similar flaws. This is because no matter what source you use to label a person or a story or an opinion liberal or conservative is going to judge it from their own particular point of view.

As there is no agreed-upon "center," it stands to reason that one cannot rely on some score -- by anybody --- as accurately describing something as "liberal" or "conservative" for purposes of studying this kind of thing.
Click to expand...

There is no center?
 
#18
#18
To add to the "this research is a farce" debate.

The research will appear in the Quarterly Journal of Economics. That journal is the second highest ranked economics journal in the world and is the oldest English language economics journal. (EDIT: One ranking has it as #1 the other has it as #2)

No way this article is published here if it is "a farce" or is seriously flawed methodologically.

Now it is debatable whether the findings support the broader conclusions or that the findings are not universally generalizable but the fact it is being published where it is being published lends considerable credibility to the research and method.
 
Last edited:
#19
#19
So lg has admitted he is biased? I thought he was dead center?

Now there is no center? Maybe Santa claus is in the center?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#20
#20
Since finding this politics board, my mind has been blown. Not in a good way.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#22
#22
MUR73 said:
Maybe if you read the article you may find out, call me crazy, though. education can be cool, my friend, try it out. I thought you Liberal types were open-minded.
Click to expand...

Ah. I'm a liberal because I joked about the wording. I see.

I would say I'm more of a don't care because I don't watch those programs.
 
#23
#23
volinbham said:
There is no center?
Click to expand...


No agreed-upon, objectively determined, and accurately measurable center, no. Which is what you need to have in order to be able to "scientifically" state that the media as a whole, or the "mainstream" media, are left or right leaning.

Those of you on the far right see the CNNs, NBCs, BCSs, etc, of the world as left leaning. But that's based on your own perception of where the center is, which in turn is informed by your own politics.

I would agree that most journalism students grow up with a progressive background -- its part of the allure of being a journalist to play the watchdog role, which naturally makes for an anti-establishment mentality. I'm just saying that some right winger -- which this professor clearly is based on his past -- cannot with any degree of "scientific" certainty characterize jack squat.

The study is propaganda. It might be right. But the representation that it is academic or scientific is flatly wrong.
 
#24
#24
lawgator1 said:
No agreed-upon, objectively determined, and accurately measurable center, no. Which is what you need to have in order to be able to "scientifically" state that the media as a whole, or the "mainstream" media, are left or right leaning.

Disagree. You yourself stated the site that posted this was suspect because it was right wing. How could you say that if there is no center? Even the critic of the study labeled various think tanks as right, center and left. The authors simply used the accepted views of right, center and left. As far as I can tell you are the only person saying this is a flaw.

Those of you on the far right see the CNNs, NBCs, BCSs, etc, of the world as left leaning. But that's based on your own perception of where the center is, which in turn is informed by your own politics.

I would agree that most journalism students grow up with a progressive background -- its part of the allure of being a journalist to play the watchdog role, which naturally makes for an anti-establishment mentality. I'm just saying that some right winger -- which this professor clearly is based on his past -- cannot with any degree of "scientific" certainty characterize jack squat.

Interesting that you state your "theory" here as "fact" but then say this type thing is not amenable to scientific inquiry.

The study is propaganda. It might be right. But the representation that it is academic or scientific is flatly wrong.
Click to expand...

You clearly don't understand academic/scientific research particularly in this area. The mere fact that it is being published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics demonstrates that it is both academic and scientific. The detailed critique IP posted also demonstrates that it is both scientific and academic with the criticism being centered on measurement issues (both how measures were constructed and how operationalized). This is very common in scientific and academic research. Propaganda, non-scientific work would not even merit such critiques.

It's also interesting that you so disagree with the findings that you've completely thrown out the notion that the topic is even amenable to scientific research. That's going along way to justify something in your mind.
 
Last edited:
#25
#25
volinbham said:
You clearly don't understand academic/scientific research particularly in this area. The mere fact that it is being published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics demonstrates that it is both academic and scientific. The detailed critique IP posted also demonstrates that it is both scientific and academic with the criticism being centered on measurement issues (both how measures were constructed and how operationalized). This is very common in scientific and academic research. Propaganda, non-scientific work would not even merit such critiques.

It's also interesting that you so disagree with the findings that you've completely thrown out the notion that the topic is even amenable to scientific research. That's going along way to justify something in your mind.
Click to expand...


So if I go and find an article that is published in a respected peer reviewed journal you will accept the conclusions therein as fact?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top