media bias

[ProVobis]

Oh great. A fact. How about a link?

A link to proper labeling?

How much would that be worth?

 

[dmelosi]

A link to proper labeling?

How much would that be worth?

It was a pretty easy search.
newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664

 

[Michael68]

A link to proper labeling?

How much would that be worth?

Some of us can’t do the link thing or even chop and slice another’s post. I don’t know how to do either

 

[Xystus]

It was a pretty easy search.
newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664

In fact, it was so easy that dvdjs posted the same link that you did in the post that you quoted. You actually deleted it when you quoted only the first line.

 

[dvdjs]

It was a pretty easy search.
newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664

I like to ask for links from those who bring up a study so that I can be sure that whatever I look at is the same are what they are talking about. There are many studies on media bias and little point in commenting on a study that is different than the one the poster had in mind when neglecting to do the “pretty easy search” to post the link in the first place.

 

[dmelosi]

I like to ask for links from those who bring up a study so that I can be sure that whatever I look at is the same are what they are talking about. There are many studies on media bias and little point in commenting on a study that is different than the one the poster had in mind when neglecting to do the “pretty easy search” to post the link in the first place.

That would be fairly easy to do as the only recent search that came up when looking for UCLA media bias, that link came up.

Here is the actual report in pdf format.

college.ucla.edu/report/vol6_media-bias.pdf

 

[qui_est_ce]

Have you looked? March for Life. Little Sisters of the Poor. (and from the Colorado affiliate.)

You are right. I wonder why these didn’t show up in my NPR fb feed? I haven’t listened to NPR on the radio for years, so I missed those stories.

 

[qui_est_ce]

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.

That was my point, thank you.

 

[dvdjs]

That would be fairly easy to do as the only recent search that came up when looking for UCLA media bias, that link came up.

The report is over a decade old.

 

[dmelosi]

The report is over a decade old.

It is frightening to think how much worse it has gotten.

 

[Michael68]

So Rachel Maddow gets hers handed to her with this illegally obtained tax return from 2005. It looks like Trump made a lot of money and paid more in taxes than her liberal heroes Great job Rachel!!!

 

[dvdjs]

It is frightening to think how much worse it has gotten.

Has it? What do more recent reports say?

 

[dmelosi]

Has it? What do more recent reports say?

I believe the media learned their lesson and put a stop to that kind of research, made them look worse than everyone thought.

 

[dvdjs]

So Rachel Maddow gets hers handed to her with this illegally obtained tax return from 2005. It looks like Trump made a lot of money and paid more in taxes than her liberal heroes Great job Rachel!!!

1. How do you figure it was obtained illegally?
2. I am happy that we have a start on disclosure of his taxes, even though it is only one year and over a decade out of date.
3. A beacon has been shined on his opposition to AMT.
4. He publicly claimed a net worth of $2.8b in 2005; his gross income - apart from the two sales of property - was surprisingly small, and worse the year before. (And of course the AGI was even less owing to business failures). The returns show that, as has been suggested, he is either not particularly good in business, or dishonest about his net worth, or both.

 

[dvdjs]

I believe the media learned their lesson and put a stop to that kind of research, made them look worse than everyone thought.

Belief is irrelevant. It’s a pretty easy search.

 

[Michael68]

1. How do you figure it was obtained illegally?
2. I am happy that we have a start on disclosure of his taxes, even though it is only one year and over a decade out of date.
3. A beacon has been shined on his opposition to AMT.
4. He publicly claimed a net worth of $2.8b in 2005; his gross income - apart from the two sales of property - was surprisingly small, and worse the year before. (And of course the AGI was even less owing to business failures). The returns show that, as has been suggested, he is either not particularly good in business, or dishonest about his net worth, or both.

???

 

[Theo520]

He is a regular contributor to both NPR and PBS. And more importantly, his views are represented in his commentary. Wasn’t the whole point that the views of registered Republicans were not being represented?

No true Scotsman fallacy.

The challenge to you was very clear - name a conservative show or employee at NPR. Are you admitting defeat?

Nobody has said they don’t have occasional ‘conservative’ guests so your citing one as evidence they aren’t fundamentally biased is a red herring.

And yes, there is ample evidence he’s not highly representative of conservatives. You’d have to pick someone that didn’t work for the NYT if you wanted to fairly represent Conservatives.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

The challenge to you was very clear - name a conservative show or employee at NPR. Are you admitting defeat?

I’m claiming it is an irrelevant challenge. I don’t doubt that there are some registered Republicans there. I don’t have access to the employee list of NPR or easy access to their party affliction. And even if I did waste my time and find one, it would not advance the argument about media bias, because you would just say “Well, that is just one”.

Nobody has said they don’t have occasional ‘conservative’ guests so your citing one as evidence they aren’t fundamentally biased is a red herring.

David Brooks is not occasional. He is a regular.

And yes, there is ample evidence he’s not highly representative of conservatives. You’d have to pick someone that didn’t work for the NYT if you wanted to fairly represent Conservatives.

As I said, the “no true Scotsman” fallacy. What you call Right and Left depends on where you draw the line for the center. I think you are drawing it way too far to the right so that only a very few will qualify.

 

[Latias]

The challenge to you was very clear - name a conservative show or employee at NPR. Are you admitting defeat?

Nobody has said they don’t have occasional ‘conservative’ guests so your citing one as evidence they aren’t fundamentally biased is a red herring.

And yes, there is ample evidence he’s not highly representative of conservatives. You’d have to pick someone that didn’t work for the NYT if you wanted to fairly represent Conservatives.

I challenged someone to provide evidence that the mainstream media favors Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton, or that they like Jeremy Corbyn.

No one has been able to do so.

Leaf has provided evidence that NPR covered stories that the conservatives alleged that the mainstream media neglected. The response is that someone’s facebook feed did not pick up those stories (which has something to do with the algorithms of facebook) and that the person doesn’t even listen to NPR.

They will continue to do so because it’s how they keep the propaganda going. And it looks America is ready to fall for it all over again sooner rather later. And this time it will pretty much be endgame.

But factually UCLA did studies and showed around 90% of the media (including FOX NEWS) leans left.

You could read the Occidental Observer if you think Fox News is left-wing. The Occidental Observer is interested in defending Western civilization.

 

[dmelosi]

I challenged someone to provide evidence that the mainstream media favors Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton, or that they like Jeremy Corbyn.

No one has been able to do so.

Left is left, Clinton and Sanders are in the same category. If the media didn’t have the fascination of the first woman president, they may have supported Sanders.

Are you really trying to make a point that because they didn’t support an avowed socialist over one who actually is one, that they are not left wing?

Leaf has provided evidence that NPR covered stories that the conservatives alleged that the mainstream media neglected. The response is that someone’s facebook feed did not pick up those stories (which has something to do with the algorithms of facebook) and that the person doesn’t even listen to NPR.

You could read the Occidental Observer if you think Fox News is left-wing. The Occidental Observer is interested in defending Western civilization.