media bias

[dmelosi]

This is basically what Rush says for three hours every day.

I am really surprised to hear that you listen to Rush 3 hours a day.

 

[ProVobis]

Most radio talk shows do not pretend to be news. They are opinion shows.

Probably true. Actual news reported about five minutes every hour.

 

[ProVobis]

The media is proving we no longer have a peaceful transfer of power in the US

Half the country disapproves of any standing president. Seems like the media likes to keep it that way. Things would get very boring otherwise.

 

[ProVobis]

I am really surprised to hear that you listen to Rush 3 hours a day.

Seems like three hours a day. We used to advertise on his show. I was one of his “friends.”

 

[dmelosi]

Seems like three hours a day. We used to advertise on his show. I was one of his “friends.”

You quit because advertising didn’t work? Ratings down?

 

[ProVobis]

You quit because advertising didn’t work? Ratings down?

I wouldn’t say that. My boss spent more money than he made.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Right, they just present a lot of articles stating abortion is not harmful./

“A lot of articles”. Yet you had to go back 6 years to find the one you cited below.

When they do cite data that goes against their liberal agenda, they follow up with the “nonpartisan [institute]” by-line qualification.

That’s what you have to do when you commit to covering both sides of a controversial issue.

I have noticed that a lot of the dissenters they quote have drawls.

Are you implying that NPR goes out of their way to find unbelievable representatives of the dissenting view?

npr.org/2011/01/27/133237875/study-abortions-dont-cause-mental-health-issues
I think I stopped listening to NPR daily after that report.

NPR was reporting on a study. They were not claiming support for the views of the study. It was published in the New England Journal of Medicine. It would be irresponsible to ignore it.

“Under Trump.” :ehh:

Yes, that is how one describes a period of time when a particular administration was in power, such as “Under Obama, they passed the ACA”, and “Under Bush, Gitmo was used for terrorist detentions”, and “Under Nixon, the Environmental Protection Agency was established”.

Oh, I left off evolution as part of their agenda.

npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/12/09/504890630/say-what-monkey-mouths-and-throats-are-equipped-for-speech

I suppose you think they should have withheld this story, which touches on evolution only to the extent that is consistent with the scientific consensus? This is not indicative of an unfair media bias. It is what all responsible news reporting agencies do.

I listen to EWTN News Nightly and Morning Glory now. Much more interesting topics from a non political pov.

That’s nice. But certain not non-political. It is much easier to make the case for that being a one-sided media outlet.

 

[dmelosi]

“A lot of articles”. Yet you had to go back 6 years to find the one you cited below.

That’s what you have to do when you commit to covering both sides of a controversial issue.

Are you implying that NPR goes out of their way to find unbelievable representatives of the dissenting view?

NPR was reporting on a study. They were not claiming support for the views of the study. It was published in the New England Journal of Medicine. It would be irresponsible to ignore it.

Yes, that is how one describes a period of time when a particular administration was in power, such as “Under Obama, they passed the ACA”, and “Under Bush, Gitmo was used for terrorist detentions”, and “Under Nixon, the Environmental Protection Agency was established”.

I suppose you think they should have withheld this story, which touches on evolution only to the extent that is consistent with the scientific consensus? This is not indicative of an unfair media bias. It is what all responsible news reporting agencies do.

That’s nice. But certain not non-political. It is much easier to make the case for that being a one-sided media outlet.

mrc.org/bozells-column/npr-admits-liberal-bias

 

[qui_est_ce]

“A lot of articles”. Yet you had to go back 6 years to find the one you cited below.

Actually there are a lot more articles promoting “safe” abortion, but the article I was looking for was the one where they cited a former Guttmacher leader as an expert on the psychological effects of abortion.
LVN:

what you have to do when you commit to covering both sides of a controversial issue.

Are you implying that NPR goes out of their way to find unbelievable representatives of the dissenting view?

Appears that way to me.
LBN:

NPR was reporting on a study. They were not claiming support for the views of the study. It was published in the New England Journal of Medicine. It would be irresponsible to ignore it.

My original argument was the NPR (or any news source) chooses which stories to promote. Why didn’t they report other studies that show the detrimental effects of abortion on women?
LBN:

Yes, that is how one describes a period of time when a particular administration was in power, such as “Under Obama, they passed the ACA”, and “Under Bush, Gitmo was used for terrorist detentions”, and “Under Nixon, the Environmental Protection Agency was established”.

This isn’t a fact piece, it’s a social commentary, implying Trump is a racist.
LBM:

I suppose you think they should have withheld this story, which touches on evolution only to the extent that is consistent with the scientific consensus? This is not indicative of an unfair media bias. It is what all responsible news reporting agencies do.

I actually don’t think they should have withheld it. They can publish what they want.
LBN:

That’s nice. But certain not non-political. It is much easier to make the case for that being a one-sided media outlet.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

mrc.org/bozells-column/npr-admits-liberal-bias

It is ironic that in trying to prove media bias at NPR you cite an opinion piece on a media outlet whose founding principle is to prove that media bias exist. In other words, the MRC is an openly biased media outlet criticizing other media outlets for bias.

 

[dmelosi]

It is ironic that in trying to prove media bias at NPR you cite an opinion piece on a media outlet whose founding principle is to prove that media bias exist. In other words, the MRC is an openly biased media outlet criticizing other media outlets for bias.

There were quite a few more out that showed the bias. A simple search showed that.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

My original argument was the NPR (or any news source) chooses which stories to promote. Why didn’t they report other studies that show the detrimental effects of abortion on women?

Were these other studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine, or similar reputable source? Maybe you should be criticizing the New England Journal of Medicine rather than NPR.

This isn’t a fact piece, it’s a social commentary, implying Trump is a racist.

It is a feature piece, featuring some people who feel threatened by the political climate that comes with Trump. In that sense it is factual. The piece does not say Trump is a racist. I don’t understand what your problem is with with story. How do you think it should have been told, if not the way they did?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

There were quite a few more out that showed the bias. A simple search showed that.

Assessing the breadth and depth of a particular view by seeing the hits from an on-line search is not a valid statistical method. A simple search for “is saquatch real” will show that.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Were these other studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine, or similar reputable source? Maybe you should be criticizing the New England Journal of Medicine rather than NPR.

They can publish whatever they want. It’s their choice of stories that beat the liberal drum. I just got tired of it.

It is a feature piece, featuring some people who feel threatened by the **political climate that comes with Trump. ** In that sense it is factual. The piece does not say Trump is a racist. I don’t understand what your problem is with with story. How do you think it should have been told, if not the way they did?

The only political climate to fear under Trump is the reaction of the left to Trump’s presidency.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

They can publish whatever they want. It’s their choice of stories that beat the liberal drum. I just got tired of it.

That explains your reaction. But it doesn’t explain why the rest of us should consider NPR to be so very liberally slanted.

The only political climate to fear under Trump is the reaction of the left to Trump’s presidency.

The people quoted in the article felt otherwise. NPR did not make it up. Now maybe those people were mistaken in their belief. You certainly think so. But is it up to a news organization to decide whose fears are justified and whose fears are not justified, and just not report on those who you think are not justified in their feelings? If they had done that, then they would have been inserting a different bias into their reporting. But apparently you wouldn’t mind if they had that particular bias.

 

[Theo520]

That explains your reaction. But it doesn’t explain why the rest of us should consider NPR to be so very liberally slanted.

The people quoted in the article felt otherwise. NPR did not make it up. Now maybe those people were mistaken in their belief. You certainly think so. But is it up to a news organization to decide whose fears are justified and whose fears are not justified, and just not report on those who you think are not justified in their feelings? If they had done that, then they would have been inserting a different bias into their reporting. But apparently you wouldn’t mind if they had that particular bias.

Are you claiming NPR isn’t liberally biased?

They don’t employ any openly conservative employees nor have a single conservative show. All their staff are card carrying democrats.

 

[qui_est_ce]

That explains your reaction. But it doesn’t explain why the rest of us should consider NPR to be so very liberally slanted.

The people quoted in the article felt otherwise. NPR did not make it up. Now maybe those people were mistaken in their belief. You certainly think so. But is it up to a news organization to decide whose fears are justified and whose fears are not justified, and just not report on those who you think are not justified in their feelings? If they had done that, then they would have been inserting a different bias into their reporting. But apparently you wouldn’t mind if they had that particular bias.

And the choice of which stories they choose to run and which stories they don’t shows their liberal bias. I have yet to see them do thorough coverage on the March for Life or interview the Little Sisters of the Poor, but they did do a story on Nuns on the Bus.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Are you claiming NPR isn’t liberally biased?

They don’t employ any openly conservative employees nor have a single conservative show. All their staff are card carrying democrats.

Juan Williams

In his case, Williams blames what he says is a small group of elitist liberal news executives at NPR who didn’t like when he expressed his opinions in other news outlets, including on the Fox News Channel.

“I think that what was behind it, in the mind of the executive that fired me, was my willingness to work for Fox, and to engage conservatives,” Williams says, “and to stand up and make arguments that often times were construed as conservative arguments, whether it was on Fox, or in print, or in books.”

I’m not faulting NPR for firing Williams, it’s their right. But it still shows bias.

 

[dmelosi]

Juan Williams
I’m not faulting NPR for firing Williams, it’s their right. But it still shows bias.

Sounds like they are even farther to the left.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Are you claiming NPR isn’t liberally biased?

Actually, no, I’m not. But I believe the bias is restricted to subtle choices in which stories to cover. I do not believe it extends to gross misinformation that we see from media outlets with less journalistic standards.

They don’t employ any openly conservative employees nor have a single conservative show.

Which “openly liberal” employees would balance against this supposed absence of conservatives? If you give me a name, I will see if I can find a name that is just as conservative and that person is liberal.