Brain Fertilizer

Yeah, I know I said blogging was suspended. But I did say I might post if I got excited.

Well, I've gotten excited a few times (guess you were right, Rae).

Here's a good argument that liberals are imploding.

If people want a device that actually blocks their household from being able to receive Fox News...well, that doesn't say much for their opinion of free speech or competition of thought. If you have to block out any contrary view of the world, perhaps your ideology is failing...?

Which isn't to say that "blocking Fox" is a wide-spread phenomenon. But the Seattle newpaper blithely repeats every hackneyed accusation of bias about Fox News without bothering to report that several independent media watchdogs have noted Fox News actually is the most fair and balanced of the news stations, that the people who don't think it is centrist are the ones who think their solid-left viewpoints are the mainstream.

...just saying, yanno?

For Randy.

Keep in mind, 'bias' is inherently a viewpoint issue. What Ralph Nader says is "unbiased" is far left to me. What I see as unbiased someone else may denigrate as fundementalist Right-Wing wacko. As one of the linked articles states, when the NY Times complains about bias, it isn't all that concerned about the obvious bias in its own pages. So what follows are discussions of bias in news reporting, because I'm having a hard time finding the article I think I saw in the kausfiles. The point made by the Opinion Journal (an openly pro-Conservative outlet) is that Fox News is considered biased by liberals because it doesn't suppress and discredit the conservative viewpoint, but rather does both sides.
Article 1

Article Two

The fact remains that on Fox News, and only on Fox News, we get television reportage that gives us at least two sides of every important issue. On all the other TV news outlets--and "mainstream" newspapers--we mostly get coverage that is hopelessly biased. The madmen have taken over the asylum and now, dressed in white lab coats, they pronounce the rest of the world insane.

Keep in mind that I found these egregious examples of bias in a single issue of a single newspaper, randomly chosen. I could do the same thing with any national news broadcast or with any paper in America except the occasional paper that still has a toehold on reality.

I wrote this essay for a newspaper that is also biased. The only difference--and it's all the difference in the world--is that the Rhinoceros Times admits that it's a conservative paper and reports events through conservative eyes. Likewise for this Web site.

Fox News Channel, on the other hand, claims to have only one bias--it is definitely pro-American--and it presents all the facts and every viewpoint and leaves the decision up to the viewer. Imagine if these news stories had been written from that perspective. They would be barely recognizable--and some of them would not have been written at all.

What makes the liberal bias in the mainstream media so pernicious is that they deny that they're biased and insist that their twisted version of events is "reality," and anyone who disagrees with them is either mentally or morally suspect. In other words, they're fanatics. And, like all good fanatics, they're utterly convinced that they're in sole possession of virtue and truth.

Article 3"

...a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found that five times more journalists at national outlets self-identify as liberal (34%) than conservative (7%). This, in and of itself, is hardly newsworthy. What speaks volumes is the fact that of the media people surveyed, 69% readily labeled the Fox News Channel a ‘conservative’ network, but most were hard-pressed to name one they would consider ‘liberal’. It just goes to show how much blatant liberalism has permeated the mainstream, under the guise of objective journalism. Dan Rather, who regularly passes off political editorial commentary as objective news delivery, is only symptomatic of a much larger mess.

Article 4

Article 5

Article 6

The next one is linked for the comment, actually, quoted verbatim:

Article 7:

actually the 'bias' that is often decried on fox comes from one source--it's opinion shows.

now, unless I've gone nuts, the whole point of opinion shows is to put for opinions, which are, by their nature, biased.

the newsbreaks are noticeable lacking in opinionating.

this cannot be said of FOXs' competitors who spin the news unmercifully. I first heard of the initial Basra uprising via the blogosphere--I then, not twenty minutes later, heard a supposedly non-biased CBS reporter tell the world that the uprising was AGAINST coalition forces--in a tone that was almost jubilant. I watch, sometimes amazed that the same story--even the same footage is reported on in widely divergant ways. The 'major' media seems to put out initial reports with an eye towards negativity towards the war effort. FOX, which will fixate and repeat positive news, puts out its initial reports without a discernable bias (their bias becomes visible in which stories they go into depth on).

So, while I agree that Hannity and O'Reilly wear their bias on their sleeves, I maintain that that's what they're there for.

Unlike the iraqi stylings of Peter Arnett, objective journalist.

Finally found it! Er, at least, I finally found an article that links to the study that tagged Fox News as the least biased Cable News Channel. I couldn't get the link to the actual study to open.

Found Another One!

"Which of these cable news organizations do you think is least biased and most objective in their reporting?"

The results:
FOX News Channel: 31 percent
CNN: 30 percent
MSNBC: 14 percent
None, all the same: 11 percent
No opinion/Don't know: 14 percent

The poll was conducted May 21-22 among 500 likely voters nationwide. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percent.

My bottom line:
1) You should not confuse Fox News Channel opinion shows from Fox News Channel news programs. The opinion shows are biased, but they're supposed to be.
2) You must consider the viewpoint of the person claiming an outlet is or isn't biased. I'm not going to listen to the NY Times opinion of any perceived bias on FNC
3) We have a decent scientific poll that has FNC as the least biased, and an independent study that shows FNC as the least biased news program. That's good enough for me.
Personally, I don't watch 'em, and I actually prefer CNN for worldwide coverage...I just have learned to read between the lines to filter out CNNs pro-UN, pro-liberal ideology, pro-Communist leanings.