Media bias in the United States is the description
of media being used to systematically present a particular point of
view. Claims of
bias in the media include
claims of liberal bias, conservative bias, mainstream bias, and
corporate bias. There are a variety of watchdog groups that attempt
to find the facts behind both biased reporting and unfounded claims
of bias, and research about media bias is a subject of systematic
scholarship in a variety of disciplines.
History
Before the rise of
professional
journalism in the early 1900s, newspapers reflected the
opinions of the publisher. Frequently, an area would be served by
competing newspapers taking views that were differing and often
radical by modern standards.
In 1728
Benjamin Franklin, writing
under the pseudonym "Busy-Body", wrote an article for the
American Weekly
Mercury advocating the printing of more paper money. He
did not mention that his own printing company hoped to get the job
of printing the money. It is an indication of the complexity of the
issue of bias when it is noted that, even though he stood to profit
by printing the money, Franklin also seems to have genuinely
believed that printing more money would stimulate trade. As his
biographer
Walter Isaacson points
out, Franklin was never averse to "doing well by doing good".
In 1798, the
Congress of
the United States passed the
Alien and Sedition Acts, which
prohibited the publication of "false, scandalous, or malicious
writing" against the government, and made it a crime to voice any
public opposition to any law or presidential act. This act was in
effect until 1801.
In 1861, President
Abraham Lincoln
accused newspapers in the
border states of bias in
favor of the
Confederate cause, and ordered
many newspapers closed.
In the 19th century, many American newspapers made no pretense to
lack of bias, openly advocating one or another political party. Big
cities would often have competing newspapers supporting various
political parties. To some extent this was mitigated by a
separation between
news and
editorial. News
reporting was expected to be relatively neutral or at least
factual, whereas editorial sections openly relayed the opinion of
the publisher. Editorials might also have been accompanied by
editorial cartoons, which would
frequently lampoon the publisher's opponents.
At the start of the 20th century many American newspapers engaged
in
yellow journalism to increase
sales.
William Randolph
Hearst, publisher of several major-market newspapers,
deliberately falsified stories of incidents, which may have
contributed to the
Spanish-American
War.
In the
years leading up to World War II,
politicians who favored the United States entering the war on the
German
side accused the international media of a
pro-Jewish bias, and often asserted that newspapers opposing entry
of the United States on the German side were controlled by Jews. They claimed that reports of German
mistreatment of Jews were biased and without foundation.
Hollywood
was said to be a hotbed of Jewish bias, and
pro-German politicians in the United States called for Charlie Chaplin’s film The Great Dictator to be banned, as
an insult to a respected leader.
During the
civil rights movement in the
1960s, some White Southerners stated that television was biased
against White Southerners and in favor of mixing of the races. In
some cases, Southern television stations refused to air programs
such as
I Spy and
Star Trek, because of their racially mixed
casts.
During the
labor union movement and the
civil rights movement, newspapers
supporting
liberal social reform were accused by conservative
newspapers of
communist bias.
In November 1969,
Spiro Agnew, then
Vice President
under
Richard Nixon, made a landmark
speech denouncing what he saw as media bias against the
Vietnam War. He called those opposed to the war
the "nattering nabobs of negativism."
Claims of a liberal bias
Liberal bias in the media occurs when liberal ideas have undue
influence on the coverage or selection of news stories.
Conservative critics of the media say some bias exists within a
wide variety of media channels including network news shows of
CBS,
ABC, and
NBC,
cable channels
CNN and
MSNBC, as well as major
newspapers, news-wires, and radio outlets, especially
CBS News,
Newsweek, and the
New York Times. The academic study cited
most frequently by critics of a "liberal media bias" in American
journalism is
The Media Elite, a 1986 book co-authored by
political scientists Robert Lichter, Stanley Rothman, and Linda
Lichter. They surveyed journalists at national media outlets such
as
The New York Times,
The Washington Post, and
the broadcast networks. The survey found that most of these
journalists were Democratic voters whose attitudes were well to the
left of the general public on a variety of topics, including such
hot-button social issues as abortion, affirmative action, and gay
rights. Then they compared journalists' attitudes to their coverage
of controversial issues such as the safety of nuclear power, school
busing to promote racial integration, and the energy crisis of the
1970s.
The authors concluded that journalists' coverage of controversial
issues reflected their own attitudes, and the predominance of
political liberals in newsrooms therefore pushed news coverage in a
liberal direction. They presented this tilt as a mostly unconscious
process of like-minded individuals projecting their shared
assumptions onto their interpretations of reality.
ABC News political director
Mark
Halperin stated that, as individuals, most journalists and news
producers hold liberal political views and these views affect their
reporting. In a survey conducted by the
American Society of
Newspaper Editors in 1997, 61% of reporters stated that they
were members of or shared the beliefs of the
Democratic Party. Only 15%
say their beliefs were best represented by the
Republican Party. This
leaves 24% undecided or Independent.
A 2002 study by
Jim A. Kuypers of Dartmouth College
, Press Bias and Politics, investigated the issue of
media bias. In this study of 116 mainstream US papers,
including The New York Times, the Washington Post, Los Angeles
Times, and the San Francisco Chronicle, Kuypers found that the
mainstream press in America tends to favor liberal viewpoints. They
found that reporters expressing moderate or conservative points of
view were often labeled as holding a minority point of view.
Kuypers said he found liberal bias in reporting a variety of issues
including
race,
welfare reform,
environmental protection, and
gun control.
Studies finding a perception of liberal bias in the media are not
limited to studies of print media. A joint study by the Joan
Shorenstein Center on Press, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard
University and the Project for Excellence in Journalism found that
viewers believe that liberal media bias can be found in television
news by networks such as
CNN. These findings
concerning a perception of liberal bias in television news –
particularly at CNN - are also reported by other sources.
Watchdog groups
Conservative organizations
Accuracy In
Media and
Media Research
Center support the claim that the media has a liberal bias, and
are dedicated, in some cases specifically, to publicizing the
issue. The Media Research Center, for example, was founded with the
specific intention to "prove ... that liberal bias in the
media does exist and undermines traditional American values".
Cited cases
Kenneth Tomlinson and the Corporation for Public
Broadcasting
Kenneth Tomlinson, while chairman
of the
Corporation
for Public Broadcasting, commissioned a $10,000 government
study into
Bill Moyers'
PBS program, "
Now with Bill Moyers" without informing the CPB board.
The results of the study indicated that there was no particular
bias on PBS, so Mr. Tomlinson chose to ignore or reject the results
of the study, subsequently reducing time and funding for
NOW with
Bill Moyers, which he regarded as a "left-wing"
program, and then expanded a show hosted by talk show host
Tucker Carlson. Some board members stated
that his actions were politically motivated. Himself a frequent
target of claims of bias (in this case, conservative bias),
Tomlinson resigned from the CPB board on November 4, 2005.
Regarding the claims of a left wing bias, Bill Moyers asserted in a
Broadcast & Cable interview that "If reporting on what's
happening to ordinary people thrown overboard by circumstances
beyond their control and betrayed by Washington officials is
'liberalism,' I stand 'convicted.' "
[165153]
Authors
Several conservative authors have written books on liberal bias in
the media. Some examples include:
Claims of a conservative bias
Conservative bias in the media occurs when conservative ideas have
undue influence on the coverage or selection of news stories.
Examples of conservative bias include:
- Capitalist Model: In the United States the
media are operated for profit, and are usually funded by advertising. Stories critical of advertisers or
their interests may in some cases be underplayed, while stories
favorable to advertisers may be given more coverage.
- Conservative Media Organizations: Certain
conservative media outlets such as NewsMax
and WorldNetDaily describe themselves
as news organizations, but are generally seen as promoting a
conservative agenda.
Rupert Murdoch, the
CEO of
News Corporation
(the parent of
Fox News), self-identifies
as a libertarian. Rupert Murdoch has exerted a strong influence
over Fox News.
In 2008
George W. Bush's press secretary
Scott McClellan published a book in which he
confessed to regularly and routinely, but unknowingly, passing on
lies to the media, following the instructions of his superiors,
lies that the media reported as facts. He characterizes the press
as, by and large, honest, and intent on telling the truth, but
reports that "the national press corps was probably
too
deferential to the White House", especially on the subject of the
war in Iraq.
E. J. Dionne,
Jr., Op Ed columnist for
The
Washington Post, writes: "For all the talk of a media love
affair with Obama, there is a deep and largely unconscious
conservative bias in the media's discussion of policy. The range of
acceptable opinion runs from the moderate left to the far right and
cuts off more vigorous progressive perspectives."
Watchdog groups
Fairness and Accuracy
in Reporting (FAIR), a self-described
progressive media
watch group has argued that accusations of liberal media bias
are part of a conservative strategy, noting an article in the
August 20, 1992
Washington
Post, in which Republican party chair
Rich Bond compared journalists to referees in a
sporting match. "If you watch any great coach, what they try to do
is 'work the refs.' Maybe the ref will cut you a little slack next
time."
Media Matters for
America, another self-described
progressive media
watch group dedicates itself to "monitoring, analyzing, and
correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media."
Cited cases
Fox News
According to former Fox News producer Charlie Reina, unlike the
AP,
CBS, or
ABC, Fox News's
editorial policy is set from the top down, stating that "The roots
of Fox News Channel's day-to-day on-air bias are actual and direct.
They come in the form of an executive memo distributed
electronically each morning, addressing what stories will be
covered and, often, suggesting how they should be covered."
WorldNetDaily
In 2008 WND Books, a subsidiary of WorldNetDaily, sponsored a
children's essay and video contest to disprove global warming
entitled "The Sky's
Not Falling." According to a story on
WorldNetDaily announcing the winners, "[t]he contest was...designed
to highlight the absurdities, untruths and downright lies that
children are being taught daily about "climate change" in public
school."
Authors
Several authors have written books on conservative bias in the
media, including:
- Eric Alterman wrote What Liberal Media? The Truth About Bias and the News,
(2003) in which he disputes the belief in liberal media bias, and
suggests that over-correcting for this belief resulted in
conservative media bias.
- Al Franken wrote Lies and the Lying Liars
Who Tell Them, (2003), in which he argues that mainstream
media organizations have neither a liberal nor a conservative
political bias, but there exists a right-wing media that seeks to
promote conservative ideology rather than report the news.
- Jim Hightower in There's
Nothing in the Middle of the Road but Yellow Stripes and Dead
Armadillos (1997; ISBN 0-06-092949-9) uses humor to deflate
claims of liberal bias, and gives examples of how media support
corporate interests.
- David Brock wrote The Republican Noise
Machine (2004).
- Amy Goodman wrote Standing up to
the Madness: Ordinary Heroes in Extraordinary Times.
Claims of a Pro-Israel media
Stephen Zunes writes that "mainstream
and conservative Jewish organizations have mobilized considerable
lobbying resources, financial contributions from the Jewish
community, and citizen pressure on the news media and other forums
of public discourse in support of the Israeli government."
According to CUNY professor of journalism,
Eric Alterman, debate among Middle East
pundits, “is dominated by people who cannot imagine criticising
Israel”. In 2002, he listed 56 columnists and commentators who can
be counted on to support Israel “reflexively and without
qualification.” Alterman only identified five pundits who
consistently criticise Israeli behaviour or endorse pro-Arab
positions. Journalists described as pro-Israel by Mearsheimer and
Walt include: the New York Times’ William Safire, A.M. Rosenthal,
David Brooks, and Thomas Friedman (although they say that the
latter is sometimes critical of areas of Israel policy); the
Washington Post’s Jim Hoagland, Robert Kagan, Charles Krauthammer
and George Will; and the Los Angeles Times’
Max
Boot,
Jonah Goldberg and
Jonathan Chait.
Rev. Billy Graham openly voiced a belief that Jews control the
American media, calling it a "stranglehold" during a 1972
conversation with President Richard Nixon, according to a tape of
the Oval Office meeting released by the National Archives. He later
apologized for the incident.
Journalist
Michael Massing writes
that "Jewish organizations are quick to detect bias in the coverage
of the Middle East, and quick to complain about it. That's
especially true of late. As
The Forward
observed in late April [2002], 'rooting out perceived anti-Israel
bias in the media has become for many American Jews the most direct
and emotional outlet for connecting with the conflict 6,000 miles
away.'"
The Forward relates how one individual feels:
"'There's a great frustration that American Jews want
to do something,' said Ira Youdovin, executive vice president of
the Chicago Board of
Rabbis.
'In 1947, some number would have enlisted in the
Haganah,' he said, referring to the
pre-state Jewish armed force.
'There was a special American brigade.
Nowadays you can't do that.
The battle here is the hasbarah
war,' Youdovin said, using a Hebrew term for public relations.
'We're winning, but we're very much concerned about the
bad stuff.'"
Indicative of the diversity of opinion is a 2003
Boston Globe profile of the
Committee
for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America media watchdog
group in which
Mark Jurkowitz
observes: "To its supporters, CAMERA is figuratively - and perhaps
literally - doing God's work, battling insidious anti-Israeli bias
in the media. But its detractors see CAMERA as a myopic and
vindictive special interest group trying to muscle its views into
media coverage."
Former spokesman for the Israeli Consulate in New York said that
the result of this lobbying of the media was: “Of course, a lot of
self-censorship goes on. Journalists, editors, and politicians are
going to think twice about criticising Israel if they know they are
going to get thousands of angry calls in a matter of hours. The
Jewish lobby is good at orchestrating pressure.”
Claims of racial bias
Political activist and one time presidential candidate
Rev. Jesse
Jackson said in 1985 that the news media portray black people
as "less intelligent than we are."
Research has shown that
African
Americans are over-represented in news reports on crime, and
within those stories, they are more likely to be shown as the
perpetrators of the crime than as the persons reacting to or
suffering from it. This is true even when crime statistics indicate
otherwise.
Conversely, multiple commentators and newspaper articles have cited
examples of the national media undereporting interracial
hate crimes when they involve white victims as
compared to when they involve black victims.
Claimed effects of profit motive
Pro-government and power bias
The pressure to create a stable, profitable business invariably
distorts the kinds of news items reported, as well as the manner
and emphasis in which they are reported, according to Professors
Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman in their book "
Manufacturing
Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media."
In their book, Chomsky and Herman say that the pro-power bias
occurs not as a result of conscious design but simply as a
consequence of market selection: those businesses who favor profits
over news quality survive, while those that present a more accurate
picture of the world tend to become marginalized. They also say
that several filters, such as the drive for advertising revenue and
the dependency of mass media news outlets upon major sources of
news, particularly the government, work to create a "
propaganda model" of the mainstream media.
To minimize the possibilities of lost revenue, therefore, outlets
will tend to report news in a tone more favorable to the government
and giving unfavorable news about the government less emphasis. The
book and related works by the authors provide numerous examples of
what they see as bias in the leading US media, most prominently in
the New York Times.
"Infotainment"
Academics such as McKay, Jamieson, and Hudson have described
private U.S. media outlets as profit-driven. For the private media,
profits are dependent on viewing figures, regardless of whether the
viewers found the programs adequate or outstanding. The strong
profit-making incentive of the American media leads them to seek a
simplified format and uncontroversial position which will be
adequate for the largest possible audience. The market mechanism
only rewards numbers of viewers, not how informed the viewers were,
how good the analysis was, or how impressed they were.
According to some, the profit-driven quest for high numbers of
viewers, rather than high quality for viewers, has resulted in a
slide from serious news and analysis to entertainment, sometimes
called
infotainment:
"Imitating the rhythm of sports reports, exciting live
coverage of major political crises and foreign wars was now
available for viewers in the safety of their own
homes.
By the late-1980s, this combination of information and
entertainment in news programmes was known as
infotainment."
[Barbrook, Media Freedom, (London, Pluto Press, 1995)
part 14]
Oversimplification
Kathleen Hall Jamieson claims
that most television news stories are made to fit into one of five
categories:
- Appearance versus reality
- Little guys versus big guys
- Good versus evil
- Efficiency versus inefficiency
- Unique and bizarre events versus ordinary events.
In these five categories, Jamieson sees a tendency towards an
unrealistic black/white mentality, in which the media simplifies
the world into comfortingly easily understood opposites. She says
the media provides an over-simplified skeleton of information which
is more easily commercialised.
Coverage of electoral politics
In the
19th century, many
American newspapers made no pretense to lack of bias, openly
advocating one or another political party. Big cities would often
have competing newspapers supporting various political parties. To
some extent this was mitigated by a separation between
news and
editorial. News reporting was expected
to be relatively neutral or at least factual, whereas editorial was
openly the opinion of the publisher. Editorials might also be
accompanied by an
editorial
cartoon, which would frequently lampoon the publisher's
opponents.
In an
editorial for
The American Conservative,
Pat Buchanan wrote that reporting
by "the liberal media establishment" on the
Watergate scandal "played a central role
in bringing down a president." Richard Nixon later complained, "I
gave them a sword and they ran it right through me." Nixon's
Vice-President
Spiro Agnew attacked the
media in a series of speeches—two of the most famous having been
written by White House aides
William
Safire and Buchanan himself—as "elitist" and "liberal."
However, the media had also strongly criticized his
Democratic predecessor,
Lyndon Baines Johnson, for his
handling of the
Vietnam War, which
culminated in him not seeking a second term.
Steve
Ansolabehere, Rebecca Lessem and Jim Snyder of the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology
analyze the political orientation of endorsements
by U.S. newspapers; (the paper is forthcoming on the Quarterly
Journal of Political Science). They find an upward trend in
the average propensity to endorse a candidate, and in particular an
incumbent one. There are also some changes in the average
ideological slant of endorsements: while in the 1940s and in the
1950s there was a clear advantage to Republican candidates, this
advantage continuously eroded in subsequent decades, to the extent
that in the 1990s the authors find a slight Democrats' lead in the
average endorsement choice.
Riccardo
Puglisi of the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology
looks at the editorial choices of the New York
Times from 1946 to 1997. He finds that the
Times displays Democratic partisanship, with some
watchdog aspects. This is the case,
because during presidential campaigns the Times systematically
gives more coverage to Democratic topics of civil rights, health
care, labor and social welfare, but only when the
incumbent president is a Republican. These topics
are classified as Democratic ones, because Gallup polls show that
on average U.S. citizens think that Democratic candidates would be
better at handling problems related to them. According to Puglisi,
in the post-1960 period the Times displays a more symmetric type of
watchdog behaviour, just because during presidential campaigns it
also gives more coverage to the typically Republican issue of
Defense when the incumbent President is a Democrat, and less so
when the incumbent is a Republican.
John Lott and Kevin Hassett of the conservative think tank
American Enterprise Institute
studied the coverage of economic news by looking at a panel of 389
U.S. newspapers from 1991 to 2004, and at a subsample of the two
ten newspapers and the Associated Press from 1985 to 2004. For each
release of official data about a set of economic indicators, the
authors analyze how newspapers decide to report on them, as
reflected by the tone of the related headlines. The idea is to
check whether newspapers display partisan bias, by giving more
positive or negative coverage to the same economic figure, as a
function of the political affiliation of the incumbent President.
Controlling for the economic data being released, the authors find
that there are between 9.6 and 14.7% fewer positive stories when
the incumbent President is a Republican.
According to
Fairness
and Accuracy in Reporting, a Democratic candidate like John
Edwards has been falsely maligned and has not been given coverage
commensurate with his standing in presidential campaign coverage
because his message questions corporate power.
A poll of likely 2008 United States presidential election voters
released on March 14, 2007 by
Zogby
International reports that 83 percent of those surveyed believe
that there is a bias in the media, with 64 percent of respondents
of the opinion that this bias favors liberals and 28 percent of
respondents believing that this bias is conservative. In August
2008 the
Washington Post
ombudsman wrote that the Post had
published almost three times as many page 1 stories about
Barack Obama than it had about
John McCain since Obama won the
Democratic party nomination
that June. In September 2008 a Rasmussen poll found that 68 percent
of voters believe that "most reporters try to help the candidate
they want to win." Forty-nine (49) percent of respondents stated
that the reporters are helping Barack Obama to get elected, while
only 14 percent said the same regarding John McCain. A further 51
percent said that the press was actively "trying to hurt"
Republican Vice Presidential nominee
Sarah
Palin with negative coverage. In October 2008,
The Washington Post media correspondent
Howard Kurtz reported that Sarah Palin
was again on the cover of
Newsweek, "but
with the most biased campaign headline I've ever seen."
After the election was over, the
Washington Post ombudsman Deborah Howell reviewed the Post's
coverage and concluded that it was tilted in favor of Obama. "The
Post provided a lot of good campaign coverage, but readers have
been consistently critical of the lack of probing issues coverage
and what they saw as a tilt toward Democrat Barack Obama. My
surveys, which ended on Election Day, show that they are right on
both counts." Over the course of the campaign, the Post printed 594
"issues stories" and 1,295 "horse-race stories." There were more
positive opinion pieces on Obama than McCain (32 to 13) and more
negative pieces about McCain than Obama (58 to 32). Overall, more
news stories were dedicated to Obama than McCain. Howell said that
the results of her survey were comparable to those reported by the
Project for
Excellence in Journalism for the national media. (That report,
issued on October 22, 2008, found that "coverage of McCain has been
heavily unfavorable," with 57% of the stories issued after the
conventions being negative and only 14% being positive. For the
same period, 36% of the stories on Obama were positive, 35% were
neutral or mixed, and 29% were negative.) While rating the Post's
biographical stories as generally quite good, she concluded that
"Obama deserved tougher scrutiny than he got, especially of his
undergraduate years, his start in Chicago and his relationship with
Antoin "Tony" Rezko, who was convicted this year of
influence-peddling in Chicago. The Post did nothing on Obama's
acknowledged drug use as a teenager."
Various critics, particularly Hudson, have shown concern at the
link between the news media reporting and what they see as the
trivialised nature of American elections.
Hudson argues that America’s news media elections damage the
democratic process.
He argues that elections are centered on candidates, whose
advancement depends on funds, personality and sound-bites, rather
than serious political discussion or policies offered by parties.
His argument is that it is on the media which Americans are
dependent for information about politics (this is of course true
almost by definition) and that they are therefore greatly
influenced by the way the media report, which concentrates on short
sound-bites, gaffes by candidates, and scandals. The reporting of
elections avoids complex issues or issues which are time-consuming
to explain. Of course, important political issues are generally
both complex and time-consuming to explain, so are avoided.
Hudson blames this style of media coverage, at least partly, for
trivialised elections:
"The bites of information voters receive from both
print and electronic media are simply insufficient for constructive
political discourse... candidates for office have adjusted their
style of campaigning in response to this tabloid style of media
coverage... modern campaigns are exercises in image
manipulation...
Elections decided on sound bites, negative campaign
commercials, and sensationalised exposure of personal character
flaws provide no meaningful direction for government".
Coverage of Iraq War
Suggestions of insufficiently critical media coverage
In February 2004, a study was released by the progressive national
media watchdog group
FAIR. According to the
study, which took place during October 2003, current or former
government or military officials accounted for 76 percent of all
319 sources for news stories about Iraq which aired on network news
channels.
On March 23, 2006, the US designated the
Hezbollah affiliated media,
Al-Nour Radio and
Al-Manar
TV station, as "
terrorist entities"
through legislative language as well as support of a letter to
President Bush signed by 51 senators.
Suggestions of overly critical media coverage
Some critics believe that, on the contrary, the American media have
been too critical of U.S. forces.
Rick
Mullen, a former journalist, Vietnam veteran, and U.S. Marine
Corps reserve officer, has suggested that American media coverage
has been unfair, and has failed to send a message adequately
supportive of U.S. forces. Mullen calls for a lesser reporting of
transgressions by US forces (condemning "American media pouncing on
every transgression"), and a more extensive reporting of US forces'
positive actions, which Mullen feels are inadequately reported
(condemning the media for "ignoring the legions of good and noble
deeds by US and coalition forces"). Mullen compares critical media
reports to the 9/11 terrorist attacks:
"I have got used to our American media pouncing on
every transgression by U.S.
Forces while ignoring the legions of good and noble
deeds performed by U.S. and coalition forces in both Iraq and
Afghanistan...
This sort of thing is akin to the evening news focusing
on the few bad things that happen in Los Angeles or London and
ignoring the millions of good news items each day...
I am sure that you are aware that it is not the enemy's
objective to defeat us on the battlefield but to defeat our
national will to prevail.
That battle is fought in the living rooms of America
and England and the medium used is the TV news and
newspapers.
The enemy is not stupid.
As on 9/11, they plan to use our "systems" against us,
the news media being the most important "system" in their pursuit
to break our national will."
[Rick Mullen, Letter to The Times, June 5 2006]
Bias in entertainment media
The
Doonesbury comic strip, a topical daily cartoon, has often
been accused of liberal bias. In 2004 a conservative letter writing
campaign was successful in convincing Continental Features, a
company that prints many Sunday comics sections, to refuse to print
the strip, causing
Doonesbury to disappear from the Sunday
comics in 38 newspapers. Of the 38, only one editor, Troy Turner,
executive editor of the
Anniston Star in Alabama,
continued to run the Sunday
Doonesbury, albeit necessarily
in black and white.
Doonesbury
was briefly dropped from
The
Guardian (UK) in September 2005, but this decision was
based on space issues brought about by the then recently adopted
format change and the perceived unpopularity of the strip with the
readership. An immediate negative response to its disappearance by
many readers caused the strip to be swiftly reinstated.
Doonesbury is not the first cartoon to blur the
distinction between the comics and editorial cartoons.
Li'l Abner by
Al Capp
routinely parodied
Southern
Democrats through the character of
Senator Jack S. Phogbound ("Ain't no
Jack S. like
OUR Jack S!).
Pogo by
Walt
Kelly caricaturized a wide range of political figures including
Joseph McCarthy,
Richard Nixon,
Hubert Humphrey,
George Wallace,
Robert F. Kennedy, and
Eugene McCarthy.
Little Orphan Annie espoused a strong
anti-union pro-business stance in the story "Eonite" from 1935,
where union agitators destroy a business that would have benefited
the entire human race.
Modern comic strips routinely take political stands.
Mallard Fillmore by Bruce Tinsley and
Prickly City by Scott Stantis
are both proudly conservative in their views. In addition to
Doonesbury,
Non
Sequitur often promotes liberal views and
Opus also promotes political views,
though those views are often somewhat blurred.
Research
A 2000 meta-analysis of research in 59 quantitative studies of
media bias in American presidential campaigns from 1948 through
1996 found that media bias tends to cancel out, leaving little or
no net bias. The authors conclude "It is clear that the major
source of bias charges is the individual perceptions of media
consumers and, in particular, media consumers of a particularly
ideological bent."
Self-described as "the first successful attempt at objectively
quantifying bias in a range of media outlets and ranking them
accordingly, a study by political scientists Tim Groseclose of UCLA
and Jeff Milyo of the University of Missouri at Columbia, both of
whom have written for conservative
think
tanks (
American
Enterprise Institute), advocacy groups (
Federalist Society), and periodicals
(
The American Spectator), was
published in December 2005 in the
Quarterly Journal of
Economics. The study's stated purpose was to document the range
of bias among news outlets. The research concluded that of the
major 20 news outlets studied "18 scored left of the average U.S.
voter, with
CBS Evening
News,
The New York
Times and
The Los
Angeles Times ranking second, third and fourth most
liberal behind the news pages of
The Wall Street Journal, while
only the
Fox News "Special Report With Brit
Hume" and
The Washington
Times scored right of the average U.S. voter." The study
also identified the
Drudge Report as
"left of center". In this study, "left" and "liberal" are treated
as synonyms, and are identified with think tanks cited by
Congressional members of the
Democratic Party, while
"right" is identified with think tanks cited by Congressional
members of the
Republican Party. The
report also states, however, that the news media show a remarkable
degree of centrism, since all but one of the outlets studied are,
from an ideological point of view, between the average Democrat and
average Republican in Congress.
The methods used to calculate this bias have
been shown to have faults as explained by Mark Liberman, a professor of Computer Science
and the Director of Linguistic Data Consortium at the
University of
Pennsylvania
. Prof. Liberman states that the model chosen
leads to "very implausible psychological claims, for which no
evidence is presented." and concludes by saying he thinks "that
many if not most of the complaints directed against G&M are
motivated in part by ideological disagreement -- just as much of
the praise for their work is motivated by ideological agreement. It
would be nice if there were a less politically fraught body of data
on which such modeling exercises could be explored."
A 1998 study from
FAIR found that
journalists are "mostly centrist in their political orientation";
30% considered themselves to the left on social issues compared to
9% on the right, while 11% considered themselves to the left on
economic issues compared to 19% on the right. The report explained
that since journalists considered themselves to be centrists,
"perhaps this is why an earlier survey found that they tended to
vote for Bill Clinton in large numbers." FAIR uses this study to
support the claim that media bias is propagated down from the
management, and that individual journalists are relatively neutral
in their work.
Additional information
According to
Reporters Without
Borders the media in the United States lost a great deal of
freedom between the 2004 and 2006 indices, citing the
Judith Miller case and similar
cases and laws restricting the
confidentiality of sources as the main
factors. They also cite the fact that reporters who question the
American "
war on terror" are sometimes
regarded as suspicious.
They rank the United States as 53rd out of
168 countries in freedom of the press, comparable to Japan
and Uruguay
, but below
all but one European Union country
(Poland
) and below most OECD countries
(countries that accept democracy and free markets).
In the
2008 ranking, the United States moved up to 36, between Taiwan
and Macedonia
, but still far below its ranking in the late 20th
Century as a world leader in having a free and unbiased
press.
According to
Noam Chomsky, American
commercial media encourage controversy within a narrow range of
opinion, in order to give the impression of open debate, but do not
report on news that falls outside that range.
According
to David Niven, of Ohio State University
, research shows that American media show bias on
only two issues, race and gender equality.
Accusers of liberal or conservative bias alike typically ignore the
dictionary meanings of those words (as do modern political
parties). In fact, in the current political discourse, the words
seem to have meaning that shifts depending on point of view. The
Oxford American
Dictionary defines "liberal" in the political sense as
"favoring democratic reform and individual liberty" and
"conservative" in the political sense as "favoring private
enterprise and freedom from government control".
See also
Organizations monitoring bias
Liberal
Conservative
References
- Introduction: Project Censored 25th
Anniversary
- Walter Isaacson, Benjamin Franklin: An American Life,
Simon & Schuster, 2004, ISBN 0-7432-5807-X
- Bruce Catton, "Bruce Catton's Civil War, Random House,
1988, ISBN 9780517447710
- W. David Sloan (Editor), Lisa Mullikin Parcell (Editor),
American Journalism: History, Principles, Practices,
McFarland & Company, April 2002, ISBN 0786413719 ISBN
978-0786413713
- Louis Pizzitola, Hearst Over Hollywood, (quoting
William Randolph Hearst) "Lindburg makes a still graver charge when
he says that the 'greatest danger' to this country lies in the
'ownership' and 'influence' of the radio, motion pictures, and 'our
government'." (quoting Douglas Fairbanks) "He [Joe Kennedy]
apparently threw the fear of god into many of our producers and
exectuives by telling them that the Jews were on the spot, and that
they should stop making anti-Nazi pictures...", Columbia University
Press, 2002, ISBN 0-231-11646-2
- Nichelle Nichols, Beyond Uhura: Star Trek and Other
Memories, Berkley, 1995, ISBN 1572970111 ISBN
978-1572970113
- Heather Cox Richardson, The Death of Reconstruction: Race,
Labor, and Politics in the Post-Civil War North, 1865-1901,
Harvard University Press, 2001, ISBN 0674006372, ISBN
978-0674006379
- Steve Estes, I Am a Man!: Race, Manhood, and the Civil
Rights Movement, The University of North Carolina Press, 2005,
ISBN 0807829293, ISBN 978-0807829295
- R. Lichter, S. Rothman, and L. Lichter, The Media
Elite. New York: Hastings House, 1991.
-
http://web.archive.org/web/20061115091552/http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/Transcript_Page.aspx?ContentGuid=45b91780-4b5d-48ff-85a3-5c03f3f6119f
- Professor's Study Shows Liberal Bias in News Media
- 09/17/2002
- [1]
- Jeffrey N. Weatherly, et al., “Perceptions of Political Bias in
the Headlines of Two Major News Organizations,” The Harvard
International Journal of Press/Politics (2007) (12), 91 at p.
97
- Accuracy In Media
official website - Accessed June 27, 2007.
- http://www.mediaresearch.org/about/aboutwelcome.asp
- Pradip N. Thomas and Zaharom Nain, Who Owns the Media?:
Global Trends and Local Resistance, Zed Books, 2005, ISBN
9781842774694
- Eric Alterman, What Liberal Media?: The Truth About Bias
and the News, Basic Books, 2004, ISBN 0-465-00177-7
- Ben Bagdikian, Media Monopoly
- Robert Greenwald and Alexandra Kitty, Outfoxed: Rupert
Murdoch's War on Journalism, The Disinformation Company, 2005,
ISBN 9781932857115
- Scott McClellan, What Happened: Inside the Bush White House
and Washington's Culture of Deception, PublicAffairs, 2008,
ISBN 978-1586485566.
-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/03/AR2009060303239.html
- [2]
-
http://web.archive.org/web/20071225012733/http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCommentary.asp?Page=%5cCommentary%5carchive%5c200311%5cCOM20031107b.html
- Eric Alterman - The Book on Bush: How
George W. (Mis)Leads America (2004)
- Al Franken. Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair
and Balanced Look at the Right. Dutton, 2003. Pages 1-3.
- Stephen
Zunes, The Israel Lobby: How Powerful is it Really?,
Foreign Policy in Focus, May 16,
2006, accessed August 27, 2006.
- Mearsheimer and Walt (2007), p170
- Mearsheimer and Walt (2007), p170-1
- Nixon, Billy Graham Anti-Semitism on Tape
- Michael
Massing, The
Israel Lobby, The
Nation, June 10, 2002, accessed August 27 2006.
- Rachel Donadio, For U.S. Jews, the Media Is the (Biased)
Message, The
Forward, April 26 2002, accessed via Archive.org August 27
2006
- Mark Jurkowitz, Blaming the Messenger, Boston Globe Magazine
February 9,
2003: 10, History News
Network (George Mason University)
April 24,
2006.
- Mearsheimer and Walt (2007), p172
- "Long Beach Hate Crime" by Kate Coe. LA
Weekly. January 04, 2007. Retrieved 9/16/09.
- "What is a hate crime?" By Howard Witt.
Chicago Tribune. June 10, 2007. Retrieved 9/16/09.
- "'Hate Crimes' and Double Standards" By Stuart
Taylor, Jr. The Atlantic. May 29, 2007. Retrieved
9/16/09.
- Kathleen Jamieson, The interplay of influence, (Belmont,
London, Wadsworth, 2000)
- Robert Dallek, Lyndon B. Johnson: Portrait of a
President, Oxford University Press, 2005, ISBN 9780195159219,
"...the terrible problems he had had with the media, newspapers,
and television..." p. 358.
- working paper version
- http://ssrn.com/abstract=573801
- Lott, John R. and Hassett, Kevin A. (October 19, 2004) Is
Newspaper Coverage of Economic Events Politically Biased?
- FAIR, December 21, 2007, "USA Today Squeezes Edwards Out of the
Race," http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3234 , also archived at
http://www.commondreams.org/news2007/1221-03.htm
- Deborah Howell, "Obama's Edge in the Coverage Race,"
The
Washington Post, August 17, 2008 (access August 18, 2008)
- Carney, Brian M "What Sarah Knows" The Wall
Street Journal, September 7, 2008 (access September 7,
2008)
- Howard
Kurtz, "Media Notes," The Washington
Post, October 6, 2008 (accessed October 6, 2008)
- Deborah Howell, "An Obama Tilt in Campaign Coverage,"
Washington Post, November 9, 2008; Page
B06
- "WINNING THE MEDIA CAMPAIGN: How the Press Reported the
2008 Presidential General Election," Project for Excellence in
Journalism, Pew Research Center, October 22, 2008 (
pdf version)
- MICHAEL CALDERONE, "Study: McCain coverage mostly negative,"The Politico, October 22,
2008
- Hudson, American Democracy in Peril: Eight Challenges to
America’s Future (Washington, D.C., CQ Press, 2004)
- Hudson, American Democracy in Peril: Eight Challenges to
America’s Future (Washington, D.C., CQ Press, 2004) pp 195-6
- US Government Press Release
- This source can also be found online:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,59-2210973.html
- "My Doonesbury Hell",The Guardian, September 14,
2005
-
http://faculty.chass.ncsu.edu/cobb/p_courses/ps411/assigned%20readings/dalessio_meta%20analyses%20media%20bias.pdf
-
http://web.archive.org/web/20061128014117/http://www.polisci.ucla.edu/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.pdf
- Boehlert, Eric. Lapdogs: How the Press Rolled Over for
Bush, Free Press, 2006. ISBN 0-7432-8931-5
- Noam Chomsky, Language and Politics, Black Rose Books,
1988, ISBN 978-0921689348
- David Niven, Tilt?: The Search for Media Bias, Praeger
Publishers, 2002, ISBN 0-275-97577-0
- The New Oxford American Dictionary, Oxford University
Press, 2005, ISBN 9780195170771
Examples/sources
- Eric Alterman, author of What
Liberal Media? The Truth About Bias and the News is
one of those who argues against any significant liberal bias.
Reviewer John Moe sums up Alterman's views:
- :"The conservatives in the newspapers, television, talk radio,
and the Republican party are lying about liberal bias and repeating
the same lies long enough that they've taken on a patina of truth.
Further, the perception of such a bias has cowed many media outlets
into presenting more conservative opinions to counterbalance a
bias, which does not, in fact, exist." ISBN 0-465-00176-9
- Media Imperialism is
a critical theory regarding the perceived effects of globalization
on the world's media. It is closely tied to the similar theory of
cultural imperialism.
- :"As multinational media conglomerates grow larger and more
powerful many believe that it will become increasingly difficult
for small, local media outlets to survive. A new type of
imperialism will thus occur, making many nations subsidiary to the
media products of some of the most powerful countries or companies.
Significant writers and thinkers in this area include Ben Bagdikian, Noam
Chomsky, Edward S. Herman and Robert McChesney."
- A
UCLA
political scientist released a peer-reviewed study
which concluded that, in general, "almost all major media outlets
tilt to the left." [165154] Self-described by UCLA as "the first
successful attempt at objectively quantifying bias in a range of
media outlets and ranking them", it used a somewhat complicated
pattern to figure out the political center of the electorate and
based the positions of the media on that center. As the first
peer-reviewed study to use this particular measure of political
position, the study's claims have been contested due to some of its
methodogy. [165155]
- :"Our results show a strong liberal bias. All of the news
outlets except Fox News’ Special Report and the Washington Times
received a score to the left of the average member of Congress. And
a few outlets, including the New York Times and CBS Evening News,
were closer to the average Democrat in Congress than the center.
These findings refer strictly to the news stories of the outlets.
That is, we omitted editorials, book reviews, and letters to the
editor from our sample." [165156]
Bibliography
External links
Non-partisan
- [165157]
Fact Check. Non-partisan factcheck of current media news.
- [165158] Facts on File. Non-partisan facts (requires
subscription).
- Pew Research
Center for the People and the Press - studies of attitudes
toward the media
-
http://web.archive.org/web/20061229200007/http://www.polisci.ucla.edu/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm
"A measure of media bias"] - working paper attempting to
statistically analyze media bias
- DebatePolitics.com A non-biased political debate forum
addressing Bias in the Media.
- Liberals Versus Conservatives A political forum where
liberals, conservatives and other affiliations can debate local and
world politics.
Claims of conservative bias
Claims of liberal bias