another article on the "liberal media"

[NewJeffCT]

From today's Hartford Courant. I need a good response and could use some help.

>>>
Yes, the media tilt left and the Earth is round. A recent poll by the Pew Research Center that has journalists debating themselves reports that the elite media are far more liberal than the public ("ordinary Americans," as the elites like to call you). Although 34 percent of journalists self-identify as liberal, only 20 percent of "ordinary" Americans do. Only 7 percent of journalists consider themselves conservative, compared with 33 percent of the public.

In 1992, 89 percent of Washington journalists voted for Bill Clinton. Ninety percent of journalists believe in a woman's right to abortion. By contrast, 49 percent of "ordinary" Americans voted for Clinton, and more than half think abortion is morally wrong, though six in 10 don't want to see Roe vs. Wade overturned.

http://www.ctnow.com/news/opinion/op_ed/hc-parker0624.artjun24,1,42129...
<<<

[fdr_hst_fan]

1. The American Media is Liberal?

T'aint what I heerd, sonny! If the American Media leans any further to the RIGHT, it's going to fall over!

[zbdent]

2. Hmm, 41 percent of the reporters are being honest

(the 34 percent as libs, the 7 percent ID'ing as conservative).

Wonder how many of the other 59 percent really are conservatives lying on their resumes?

[never cry wolf]

3. That's the journalists

NOT the editors and owners who decide what gets printed, what gets air time and how much of both.

The editors and owners are overwhelmingly conservative.

[NewJeffCT]

4. can you give me proof of that?

I'd love to send in a nice LTTE

[never cry wolf]

7. Here ya go

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2002/123102a.html

The core of the conservative “liberal media” case is that surveys have shown that a majority of journalists vote Democratic in presidential elections. Therefore, conservatives argue that a pro-Democratic bias permeates the American news media. Conservatives then bolster this claim of liberal bias with anecdotes, such as the alleged inflections of Dan Rather’s voice on the CBS Evening News or the supposed overuse of the word “ultra-conservative” in news columns.

But other surveys on the views of individual journalists suggest a more complicated picture. Journalists generally regard themselves as centrists with more liberal views on social issues and more conservative ones on economic issues, when compared with the broader American public. For example, journalists might be more likely to favor abortion rights, while less likely to worry about cuts in Social Security and Medicare than other Americans.

But the larger fallacy of the “liberal media” argument is the idea that reporters and mid-level editors set the editorial agenda at their news organizations. In reality, most journalists have about as much say over what is presented by newspapers and TV news programs as factory workers and foremen have over what a factory manufactures.

That is not to say factory workers have no input in their company’s product: they can make suggestions and ensure the product is professionally built. But top executives have a much bigger say in what gets produced and how. The news business is essentially the same.

News organizations are hierarchical institutions often run by strong-willed men who insist that their editorial vision be dominant within their news companies. Some concessions are made to the broader professional standards of journalism, such as the principles of objectivity and fairness.

But media owners historically have enforced their political views and other preferences by installing senior editors whose careers depend on delivering a news product that fits with the owner’s prejudices. Mid-level editors and reporters who stray too far from the prescribed path can expect to be demoted or fired. Editorial employees intuitively understand the career risks of going beyond the boundaries.

These limitations were true a century ago when William Randolph Hearst famously studied every day’s paper from his publishing empire looking for signs of leftist attitudes among his staff. And it is still true in the days of Rupert Murdoch, Jack Welch and the Rev. Sun Myung Moon.

The Republican and conservative bent of senior media management also is not limited to a few “name” publishers and executives. A survey conducted before Election 2000 by the industry magazine, Editor & Publisher, found a strong bias in favor of George W. Bush among top editorial decision-makers nationwide.

Newspaper editors and publishers favored Bush by a 2-to-1 margin, according to the survey of nearly 200 editors and publishers. Publishers, who are at the pinnacle of power within news organizations, were even more pro-Bush, favoring the then-Texas governor by a 3-to-1 margin, E&P reported. Gazing through the rose colors of their pro-Bush glasses, the news executives incorrectly predicted a Bush electoral landslide in November 2000.


LOTS more info here---> http://www.makethemaccountable.com/myth/LiberalMedia.htm

An excerpt from Eric Alterman's article in The Nation about his book

What Liberal Media?

by Eric Alterman

[Peregrine]

5. Right, there is a thing called editorial policy

Regardless of a reporter's leaning, he/she must toe the editorial policy line of their respective media organization. If they don't the editor will do it for them.

[HootieMcBoob]

6. Read "What Liberal Media"

by Eric Alterman. He has tons of info/stats and so forth in there. For example: More newspapers endorsed Bush for President in 2000 than Gore.

[kaitykaity]

8. Bartcop's "The Myth of the Liberal Media"

is pretty good, too.
http://www.bartcop.com

You also might want to check out legitimate liberal
media sources like Guerilla News Network, Indy Media,
and others to see what a real liberal media would look
like.

Another good one is http://www.takebackthemedia.com

[JHB]

9. Link to the study

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=831