I always find it funny how on republican message boards they think the media is biased against them and on democrat message boards they think the media is biased against them. I don't really get it.

However, Dan Rather nails it.



The media doesn't really have a liberal or conservative slant, they have a profit motive slant.

"The news stops with making bucks"

Next time you think the media is being biased, consider that they are really just telling the story that will make them the most money.

Damn skippy. The media is the only reason Hillary was in the race as long as she was. It's got a vested interest in drama and dragging out the whole dog and pony show.

From what I've seen, this election is Obama's to lose. Electorally, he's got a bit of a cushion over McCain. But you'll never hear the media say it...A neck and neck race is WAY more exciting and gets more $$$.

I guess, the idea is that if a person has worked for a Democrat or worked as a Democrat and then becomes a news person, then the assumption is that person will lean left in their stories and analysis. Likewise for Republicans.

And I've seen studies done where a much higher percentage of media people have worked for Democrats than Republicans.

That the idea at least.

__________________
ProjectOKC.com

Because the media IS biased. That's why people think it.

Yeah, but they lean in their own direction. Which would be the direction that perpetuates the stories that generate the most ad revenue. In other words...Partisanship is good for CNN as well as Fox because people like to see fights. I'd bet that the country wouldn't be nearly as divided as they portray if they quit portraying that way. Westboro Baptist Church wouldn't get 5 seconds of air time if the media actually reported what mattered.

I think the fact that the ratings for the national conventions were heavily in Fox news' favor is a perfect example of how the public is sick of the bias of CNN, and the big 3. Don't misunderstand me, Fox is not fair and balanced, but I think their ratings demonstrate a public backlash against their competition. I also think the dismal ratings and/or subscription rates for major media outlets would not support the idea that the media is only looking to increase ratings and ad revenue and therefore are giving people what they want.

All news is biased, it just so happens that the majority of the bias is to the left. Fox News is the only major TV outlet that provides the other side and therefore they are seeing a ratings boost.

Interesting stats here...

# of viewers for Obama speech:
CNN: 8.1 MILLION
ABC: 6.6 MILLION
NBC: 6.1 MILLION
CBS: 4.7 MILLION
FOXNEWS: 4.2 MILLION
MSNBC 4.1 MILLION

# of viewers for McCain speech:
FOXNEWS 9.2 MILLION
NBC 8.7 MILLION
ABC: 6.0 MILLION
CBS: 5.3 MILLION
CNN 4.8 MILLION
MSNBC 2.5 MILLION

It's interesting to note that, except for MSNBC, CNN ended up at the bottom of viewers for McCain and FOX NEWS at the top.

And except for MSNBC again, FOX NEWS ended up at the bottom of viewers for the Obama and CNN at the top.

Very stereotypical if you ask me.

__________________
ProjectOKC.com

To a certain extent, though, you could about combine the NBC/MSNBC ratings, since for a lot of the pre- and post- speech analysis, they did share some commentators, Tom Brokaw and Brian Williams notwithstanding.

I guess that on the rare occasions that I watch the national news on NBC/ABC/CBS, I disagree with their commentary a lot, which leads me to believe they are leaning more to the left (mostly the opposite of my views). Fox news isn't any better though. They've become more the polar opposite to NBC/ABC/CBS rather than the more moderate-conservative that they used to be early on. For every Keith Olberman, there's Sean Hannity. My feeling is that Rather is right about it being mostly about money. I feel he was pretty left-leaning himself though for the last few years he was on, but I'm sure there was pressure for him to be so.

Oddly, I think CNN has been working more on keeping a balance since the 2004 election. I've seen a little of both sides on their news, especially in the last year or so.

__________________
My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind
Albert Einstein

Numerous studies have shown that people who watch Fox News are the most likely to hold misconceptions on various issues.

Wait.,..what? where are those studies? Liberal teachers' colleges?

Link please.

It suprise me how many believe everything they hear, read or watch from the media.

The best advice I was ever give is "Never take anything at face value, take the time to do your homework before you make decision or form an opinion."

If you think about are media is not anymore reliable than the rumor mill in the average American high school.

I'm not surprised you don't get it, most liberals don't, or should I say, just aren't willing to be honest about it. However, you gotta give MSNBC credit for admitting that they're programing caters to the leftist crowd MSNBC Moves Further Left, Air America Host Gets Own Show | NewsBusters.org. MSNBC has only ONE republican on their network, Joe Scarborough.

It's no wonder that their audience is the lowest of all cable news outlets. It's interesting how the leftist TV and radio programs (including Air America who's now bankrupted) don't have the same high ratings as the conservative stations do.

Mediaresearch.org's own research shows that the majority of the media are not only democrats, they vote overwhelmingly for democrats.
Media Bias Basics

No media bias, eh. ? Yeah right!

Exactly right! Sadly, too many people in America, both left and right, are Kool Aid drinkers and believe whatever has been reported.

Pot meet kettle.

Freedom of the press belongs to the man who owns the press.

Rather didn't come up with this idea--it's been around for a long time.

Hearst had some anti-trust trouble because of the number of papers he owned and his use of them.

Marshal McCluhan had similar views. But, the best critique of the media's money bias probably comes from Noam Chomsky.

You know, if you accept what many people are saying...that the majority of the media is slanted towards a liberal presentation...and only Fox represents the view from the right, then you can't look at the individual ratings as posted above. Take McCain's speech, for example: 9.2 million people watched it on Fox, which would be the more conservative news outlet. But a combined 27.3 million viewers preferred a more liberal outlet of some sort. That's a 3 to 1 ratio, folks.

But Fox does not represent the view from the right, Fox(and all of the networks) represent the view that makes it the most money.

The left/right thing is just something that we are making up ourselves. The only view they have is the view for dollars.

Does the removal of MSNBC's anchors mean anything?

It had more to do with the fact that they were at each other's throats on the show than it did anything else.

That could be. I understand they are being kept for analysis at this point.

Even NPR this morning reported MSNBC made the move they did because having two anchors who lean obviously to the left was ruffling the feathers of the NBC news folks who actually try to be unbiased.

__________________
ProjectOKC.com

Yet another reason good ole Tim Russert left this world entirely too early.

It's clear to me that average folks seek out media that help them rationalize and strengthen their preexisting belief structure (no matter how rational or irrational). People simply aren't interested in challenging their own beliefs. Fox News Channel smartly identified a market of people who believe in nonsense such as the "War on Christmas", secular liberals trying to destroy America, and so forth, and they market programs toward the interests of those people. MSNBC has recently gone after the other end of the spectrum with Olbermann and Maddow the new stars and their ratings now improving.

I see the same thing on message boards. People who stake out their positions on one extreme obviously get their talking points and "information" (usually half-truths and opinions) from web sites within their own echo chambers, such as dailykos on the left and worldnetdaily on the right. It's so rare now for anybody to go seek out viewpoints they are uncomfortable with and admit that the "other side" might have some valid arguments.

One thing that is irrational is the amount of time people worry about mainstream media bias. I think "Rathergate" showed us that the media can be held accountable for biased reporting. In other words, they can't get away with it, because someone will always be able to follow the paper trail and the money trail and get to the facts. Public officials and political parties that are constantly using "media bias" as an excuse to avoid tough questions send up a red flag that they have something to hide.