Study Sees Continued Decline in Overall Credibility of News Media

[the G-man]

sidious618 wrote:

---

How is this at all hard to understand?

Actually, I understand perfectly. You're a liberal. Therefore, the Times seems "middle of the road" to you. You're basically doing the same thing as the staffers discussed in the article.

[J.T.B.]

CorporalCaptain wrote:

---

That's an interesting theory, thanks for that.

It is interesting, though if true I wouldn't say it's a positive development!

the G-man wrote:

---

Admitting a problem is good but fixing it would seem to be better.

Fixing what? The newsroom of a paper in a city that is two-thirds Democratic has a staff that skews left. That's news? What's not provided is evidence of reportorial misconduct or even bias. The biggest NYT "scandal" in recent memory was not critically questioning Bush administration claims in the run-up to the Iraq war, not really a liberal-progressive cause.

the G-man wrote:

---

So you think it enhances their credibility to acknowledge a problem that doesn't exist? Ohhhhkayyy....

"They" aren't acknowledging anything, it's an individual's personal view in an opinion column.

Justin

[sidious618]

the G-man wrote:

---

Actually, I understand perfectly. You're a liberal. Therefore, the Times seems "middle of the road" to you. You're basically doing the same thing as the staffers discussed in the article.

Bullshit, I'm afraid. I'm liberal but I'm perfectly capable of seeing what does and doesn't have a liberal bias. MSNBC is massively biased towards the liberal side, for example, so much so that I'd never watch it. The fact is that conservatives for years have decried anything that goes against their worldview. It's not that the NYT is liberal, it's that it says things which are inconvenient for the conservative viewpoint.

[Robert Maxwell]

At this point it seems to me that "liberal bias" is used to describe any point-of-view that isn't anti-gay, anti-women, anti-tax, pro-Christian, and pro-war.

[the G-man]

sidious618 wrote:

---

Bullshit, I'm afraid. I'm liberal but I'm perfectly capable of seeing what does and doesn't have a liberal bias. MSNBC is massively biased towards the liberal side, for example

Yes. Massively. But that doesn't mean the NYT isn't also biased, albeit much less so.

The fact is that conservatives for years have decried anything that goes against their worldview.

While I fully admit this is not a scientific sample, I know far more conservatives who are willing to listen to or read center-left material than liberals who do so with center-right material.

It's not that the NYT is liberal, it's that it says things which are inconvenient for the conservative viewpoint.

The problem is that, lately, you are getting a certain number of liberals or moderates, often in the media themselves also saying that they've let their biases get the better of them. There's the outgoing NYT editor, cited above.

Here's the bottom line: you saying you're not biased or the NYT isn't because you're/it's not as bad as MSNBC would be like me saying I'm not biased because I'm better than Glenn Beck. That doesn't disprove bias. If anything it shows a bias.

[sidious618]

the G-man wrote:

---

Here's the bottom line: you saying you're not biased or the NYT isn't because you're/it's not as bad as MSNBC would be like me saying I'm not biased because I'm better than Glenn Beck. That doesn't disprove bias. If anything it shows a bias.

That's not what I said at all.

[Robert Maxwell]

All news media are biased, but some biases are more onerous than others. There are biases that push a particular sociopolitical agenda, and then there are biases that ignore facts and reality and instead produce fabricated nonsense.

[CorporalCaptain]

I'd like to see concrete evidence of bias in the form of specific examples, if someone's going to be throwing around the charge. Not a vague appeal to the fact that ya know the staff leans a certain way.

[Hound of UIster]

Most news organizations are actually are more right leaning than left leaning.

Interesting graph from the Atlantic.

[J.T.B.]

CorporalCaptain wrote:

---

I'd like to see concrete evidence of bias in the form of specific examples, if someone's going to be throwing around the charge. Not a vague appeal to the fact that ya know the staff leans a certain way.

Yeah, me too. It's just like NPR. Last year there was a gotcha video of an NPR exec expressing his personal left-of-center opinions, and a big cry went up on the right: "See, NPR has a liberal bias!" But nobody could point to examples of biased reportage. NPR's "On the Media" show did a story with self-identified conservative listeners who reported what they perceived as bias. And it basically came down to "Well, I can't put my finger on it, but I know it when I hear it." Transcript here: http://www.onthemedia.org/2011/mar/2...le/transcript/

So if it's all subjective -- as in the NYT public editor piece, where he had to use weasel words like "seems to" -- then how could that perception problem be remedied? Have a quota system where prospective reporters have to provide proof of political views? I don't see how something like that would work. It seems to me the most practical course is for readers who perceive a particular slant to either take that into account and adjust for it, or find another news source.

Justin

[CorporalCaptain]

J.T.B. wrote:

---

Yeah, me too. It's just like NPR. Last year there was a gotcha video of an NPR exec expressing his personal left-of-center opinions, and a big cry went up on the right: "See, NPR has a liberal bias!" But nobody could point to examples of biased reportage. NPR's "On the Media" show did a story with self-identified conservative listeners who reported what they perceived as bias. And it basically came down to "Well, I can't put my finger on it, but I know it when I hear it." Transcript here: http://www.onthemedia.org/2011/mar/2...le/transcript/

This transcript is invaluable. I can actually see the points made by the conservative listeners. It should be required reading for every journalism student.

So if it's all subjective -- as in the NYT public editor piece, where he had to use weasel words like "seems to" -- then how could that perception problem be remedied? Have a quota system where prospective reporters have to provide proof of political views? I don't see how something like that would work. It seems to me the most practical course is for readers who perceive a particular slant to either take that into account and adjust for it, or find another news source.

No quotas.

[Drago-Kazov]

Maxwell posted:

Those are both fun shows but I would never use them as my main news sources. That will do nothing but give you a very cynical, very distorted view of reality.

He told as how politicians are a long time ago and he was rarely wrong.

G-Man posted:

While I fully admit this is not a scientific sample, I know far more conservatives who are willing to listen to or read center-left material than liberals who do so with center-right material.

Both sides like to live in a bubble.

At this point it seems to me that "liberal bias" is used to describe any point-of-view that isn't anti-gay, anti-women, anti-tax, pro-Christian, and pro-war.

Liberals are still anti-war?