Tuesday, June 28, 2005

A Brief Pause from Our Sponsors
That being me...

Well I’m home for a bit, back in the lovely state of Oregon, for a brief vacation I suppose you can call it. I'm back to visit with my folks and go to a few friends weddings, which seem to happen with greater frequency as time goes on. All these wedding presents, how many place settings can everyone really want? Next thing they'll be having kids and what not, and I'll have to buy presents for them to. I’m not sure my budget can handle this. Who am I kidding, so far I’ve mostly been chipping in with my folks for the gifts; translation I choose it, they pay for it.

Be on the look out for infrequent updates on my travels and tomfoolery as the next week unfolds. Also my liberal media postings will continue once I return to DC.

Thursday, June 23, 2005

It keeps coming
"Liberal Media" ?...

Fourth in a series

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Cable news is a relative young feature of the national news media. Having its beginnings in the early Eighties, but coming of age within the past decade, it now is the main source of information for many American’s whose schedule don’t allow for the traditional networks new broadcast in the early evening.[1]

The forefather of the cable news format is CNN. Cable News Network or CNN is the original 24-hour news station. Launched in 1980 by Ted Turner, it is a division of the Turner Broadcasting System, owned by Time Warner and currently has a reach of over 88.2 million homes. CNN is traditionally known for its ability to show events quickly, frequently, and at great length. The first major attention garnered by CNN was during the 1991 Persian Gulf War, where it featured unprecedented news coverage from the ground. CNN broadcasts primarily from its headquarters at the CNN Center in Atlanta as well as from studios in New York City and Washington, D.C.

Thought not the first, Fox News Channel is now America’s “most watched news channel”. Owned by the Fox Entertainment Group, a subsidiary of Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation, it is available to 85 million subscribers in the United States. First launched in October of 1996, the network quickly gained standing in the late 1990’s as it started taking market share away from CNN. Fox News presents a wide variety of programming, with up to 15 hours of live programming per day. Fox primarily broadcasts out of its Rockefeller Center studios in New York City.

Two of the networks trade mark slogans are “Fair and Ballanced" and “We Report, You Decide”. The obvious implication of these two catch phrases is that all the other networks deliver a skewed perspective. However it is most often fox that is accused of having a bias in its reporting.[2]

The last station I will analyze is MSNBC, a 24-hour news channel available in over 76 million households in the U.S. and with most broadcasting coming primarily from its studios in Secaucus, New Jersey. Founded by Microsoft and General Electric, which owns NBC Universal, and launched in July of 1996, MSNBC is currently America's third-most-watched cable news channel, after Fox News and CNN.

According to a study by Tien-Tsung Lee in the Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, “despite research to the contrary, the general public and a significant number of politicians are convinced the U.S. news media have a liberal and pro-Democratic bias. Findings based on two large national surveys suggest that audiences' ideologies and partisanships affect how they view the media. Strong conservatives and Republicans are more likely to distrust the news media, whereas the best predictor of a media bias perception is political cynicism”.[i]

One of the primary promoters of the accusation of a liberal media is the Media Research Center (MRC) founded by Brent Bozell in October of 1987. This group’s self described mission is to “bring balance and responsibility to the news media” and prove that “liberal bias in the media does exist and undermines traditional American values”. They aim to not only expose the heinous liberal scoundrel influence on media, but to “neutralize its impact on the American political scene”.[3]

In a special repot released by the MRC in June of 2004 entitled “The Liberal Media Every Poll Shows Journalists Are More Liberal than the American Public — And the Public Knows It” they describe how “surveys over the past twenty-five years have consistently found that journalists are more liberal than rest of America”. This MRC Special Report summarized the relevant data on journalist attitudes, as well as polling showing how the American public’s recognition of the media’s liberal bias has grown over the years: This data was broke down into four sections. The first area outlines how journalists vote for liberals, the next that journalists say they are liberal, thirdly journalists reject conservative positions, and finally that the public recognizes the bias.[ii]

Much of MRC’s argument is centered on journalist personal opinions documented either in studies or on political talk shows where they are asked to express their own opinions. While this provides an interesting insight into how the reporter’s cognitive thought process operates, I feel it is a poor argument for bias since there is no collaborating evidence of biased “hard news” produced. Since the professional journalists community ascribe to an ethos of accuracy, attention which would be called to it if violated. Instead of a liberal bias being scene, many journalists in retrospect are seeing more self censorship the norm, especially in today’s political climate.[4]

This survey, full of old data[5], was conveniently released five months prior to the 2004 presidential elections, packaged to fit current political models. For example, journalists are reported as voting for Democrats in elections. This is faulty reasoning to equate them with liberalism. While some Democrats are liberal, the most recent Democratic president, Bill Clinton, was seen as centrist by most. Also the data from the 1970’s political voting record of journalist is very dated both because the body of journalist has changed since then and because the nature of the political parties has shifted since then.[iii]

Similarly in his book Weapons Of Mass Distortion: The Coming Meltdown of the Liberal Media, Bozell, from his clearly conservative bias, unsuccessful attempts to prove that the news-reporting media is more liberally biased than it is conservatively. Kirkus Review is quick to point out that while he maintains that he is talking about liberal bias in hard reporting, not commentary, he repeatedly draws on liberal commentators as exemplars of bias.[iv]



[1] In a June 2002 study by the Pew Research Center it’s reported that “About half (48%) describe themselves as news grazers ­ people who check in on news from time to time over the course of the day. Roughly the same proportion (49%) get the news more habitually, watching or listening at regular times. Compared to habituals, grazers are considerably younger, less interested in serious news, and use media sources at lower rates ­ except for cable and online news.” http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=156

[2] This identity could be due to their abundance of conservative on-air personalities. Media Matters for America has logged over 520 instances where Fox News has broadcast questionable news content. This is compared to a tally of 175 incidences against CNN and 178 for MSNBC.

[3] Not quite the fair and balanced approach from the start you would look for in a media analysis group. But those damn conservatives, our way or the highway, or more aptly Guantanamo Bay.

[4] Take special note of media censorship in Iraq war coverage in later sections.

[5] Data taken largely from survey conducted in the early 1970’s and 1980’s. No offense is meant for those who see these eras as not too long ago, my apologies, but the pace at which politics and media change from day to day is vitally important, so data aged this much will have little in a current study unless its purpose is examining trends or changes.



[i] Lee, T. (2005) The liberal media myth revisited: An examination of factors influencing perceptions of media bias. [Abstract] Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49, No.1, 43-64. Retrieved April 22, 2005, from http://www.leaonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15506878jobem4901_4

[ii] Noyes, R. (2004) The liberal media: Every poll shows journalists are more liberal than

the American public — and the public knows it. Alexandria, VA: Media Research Center. Retrieved April 22, 2005, from http://www.mediaresearch.org/specialreports/2004/sum/sum063004.asp

[iii] Ibid.

[iv] Weapons Of Mass Distortion: The Coming Meltdown of the Liberal Media (Book). (2004, May 1). [Review]. Kirkus Reviews, 72, Issue 9, 427. Retrieved April 23, 2005, from Academic Search Premier database.

Wednesday, June 22, 2005

Even More "Liberal Media" ?...
Third in a series

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Why then the large perception of a liberal media bias? Where is it founded?
Let’s first define some of the core terms we will be using with frequency. Merriam-Webster's defines bias as “an inclination of temperament or outlook; especially: a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment or prejudice, also a systematic error ... encouraging one outcome or answer over others”.[i] Donna Rouner, Michael Slater, and Judith Buddenbaum in their article How perceptions of news bias in news sources relate to beliefs about media bias”, specifically define media bias as a “perceived attribute of a news source whereby the individual news source, or the group the news source represents, has a clear, vested interest in a cause or action relative to maintaining or changing the status quo.” They go on to explain “A highly biased source generally would be presented in a journalistic account as operating to alter the status quo in some fashion, like eliminating taxes or making abortions illegal. A biased journalistic perspective, then, would mean only one side, not two or more sides, of an issue is presented.”[ii]

The two opposing attitudes of this divide can be labeled as liberal and conservative in persuasion. Liberal, also referred to in this paper as progressive, can be defined a political [belief] associated with ideals of individual freedom, greater intellectual liberty, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives, such as the U.S. Constitution.[iii] [1]

Conservative, or more accurately for this work, neoconservatives, are characterized by an aggressive moralist stance on foreign policy, a lesser social conservatism, weaker dedication to a policy of minimal government.[iv] [2]

For the sake of full disclosure, I perceive myself as ascribing to a liberal/progressive point of view. I feel former President John F. Kennedy sums up my views, “If by a Liberal they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people – their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties – someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a Liberal, then I'm proud to say I'm a Liberal”.

Now that we have a lexicon, let’s look to the medium we will be examining. While most news media is interrelated taking cues from each other, if not directly connected though business conglomerates owning controlling proportions, I will focus on three specific stations and three news events while still giving appropriate attention to other news media.



[1] Classic antagonistic descriptions also include whiner, America hater, traitor, hippie, liar, communist, hypocrite, tax raising, hard work hating, baby killing, and elitist snobs. Usually used when losing in a discussion or writing a book.

[2] Also referred to as bible-thumping, gun-loving, uneducated, inbred rednecks, confederate-flag-waving, bastards. Most often referred to as such after an evening of imbibing.



[i]Bias: Definition. Marion-Webster Online. Retrieved April 24, 2005, from http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=bias&x=20&y=13

[ii] Rouner, D., Slater, M.D., & Buddenbaum, J.M. (1999) How perceptions of news bias in news sources relate to beliefs about media bias. [Electronic Version] Newspaper Research Journal. 20, Issue 2, 41-52

[iii] Liberal: Wikipedia encyclopedia. Retrieved , April 21, 2005 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal

[iv] Conservative: Wikipedia encyclopedia. Retrieved , April 21, 2005 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative

Tuesday, June 21, 2005

"Liberal Media" ?...Contiued
The second in a series

---------------------------------------------------------------------
The traditionally high place held for the news media has been diminishing of late. A Pew Research Center (PRC) polls found that in July of 2003 only 52% of those polled believe that the press protects democracy, 20% thought it did neither or they didn’t know, and 28% believe that it actually hurts democracy. This concern could be linked to popular belief that the media is increasingly biased. In the same PRC poll, even though 62% agreed that news organizations were “highly professional”, 53% also agreed that they were “politically biased”, with 51% overall believing they have a liberal ideological tilt.[i] Oliver Willis, a progressive political blogger of note, attributes this to the “republican noise machine” of conservative pundits continually decrying the “liberal elite” media for being biased

This perceived news media bias runs contrary to the professional code of ethics outline by the SPJ. It clearly states, “conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist's credibility.”[ii] They put forward four imperative ethical areas for journalist.

First journalist must seek truth and report it. Specifically “journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information”. Next is the aim to minimize harm. Elaborating SPJ explains “ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect”. The last two guidelines are perhaps most important in the battle for objective accuracy. The third guideline calls for journalist to act independently, “journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to know”. Lastly PSJ directs journalist to be accountable. “Journalists are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other. Journalists should: clarify and explain news coverage and invite dialogue with the public over journalistic conduct, encourage the public to voice grievances against the news media, admit mistakes and correct them promptly, expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media, and abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.”[iii]

While not mandatory, the SPJ Code of Ethics is voluntarily embraced by thousands of
writers, editors and other news professionals. The present version of the code was adopted by the 1996 SPJ National Convention, after months of study and debate among the Society's members.


[i] Strong Opposition to Media Cross-Ownership Emerges: Public Wants Neutrality and Pro-American Point of View. (July 13, 2003) Pew Research Center. Retrieved April 26, 2005, from http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=188.

[ii] Code of Ethics. Society of Professional Journalists. Retrieved April 25, 2005, from http://www.spj.org/ethics_code.asp

[iii] Ibid

"Liberal Media" ?
The first of a multipost series

---------------------------------------------------------------------
In our three-tiered government of federal, congressional, and judicial powers, there is a forth branch, keeping an eye on all the others. This pillar of our politic is the news media, the eyes and ears of the public. Their duty is inform us about our public servants actions and the countries events. American founding father Thomas Jefferson stated “The only security of all is in a free press. The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure.” Clearly the importance of media integrity cannot be underestimated. It is then perplexing to hear some accuse this institution, divided among few hands, as being biased and liberal. While I prescribe to a liberal mindset, I am still uncomfortable with a subjective news source since it is often my only recourse for information when making civic decisions.

But is this accusation entirely correct or simply a reaction by sects of ideologs who are upset with truthful reporting that fails to support their opinions? In this paper I will investigate the claim of a liberal bias in the media, focusing particularly in the realm of cable news networks, specifically CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC, who devote 24 hours a day presenting the public with the news and informative commentary. Investigating reports and statistical breakdowns of various news events, with special attention paid to three important news events of the last year; the death and funeral of Ronald Reagan, the 2005 Presidential inauguration and the coverage of the United States involvement in Iraq, I will evaluate the validity of the claims of a liberal media bias filling the airwaves.

As suggested before the role of journalism is pivotal in a democracy. But what exactly is a journalist? In today’s new media age of the internet and blogging anyone can post “news” without any prior standing or experience. The Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) defines a professional journalist as one who can “provide information in an accurate, comprehensive, timely and understandable manner”. Journalists who are part of the SPJ prescribe to the opinion that their mission should be to aid in the “perpetuation of a free press as the cornerstone of our nation and our liberty”. They go on to declare that “to ensure that the concept of self-government... remains a reality into future centuries, the American people must be well informed in order to make decisions regarding their lives, and their local and national communities.” [i] Journalist should provide the information to guide this process. This is a heavy responsibility with innate imbedded power

The influence journalist wield is due in part to their expansive reach and supposed credibility. In America, freedom of expression, and its firstborn free press, is the first entitlement guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. This high calling, as many see it, should aim to be an impartial observer and reporter for those who cannot be there first hand. This ideal is difficult, if not nearly impossible, to achieve, because every person will have their own standards and beliefs that affect them on a personal level. Idyllically a true professional should be able to put their personal platform behind them for the sake of accuracy. This is where the arguments of a biased press for many begins.

....To Be Contiued......

Endnotes

[i] SPJ Mission. Society of Professional Journalists. Retrieved April 25, 2005, from http://www.spj.org/spj_missions.asp

Tuesday, June 14, 2005

Well hello. This is a simple test post to just get my feet wet.

Things can only get bigger from here i suppose. Hopefully in the following days/weeks you will check back and find all kinds of fun ramblings on Politics, the many manifestations of popular culture that i enjoy, and jucy tidbits from my ever churning cerebral cortex.

Until then, peace.