LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS, Miscellaneous, College Term Papers.com


		Data Bases
		• Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism?

		Links
		• Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com

		Free Essays
		• Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • My Term Papers • Get Free Essays • Essay World • Planet Papers

Search Lots of Essays

Back to Subjects - Miscellaneous

LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS

LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS Is there a liberal bias in the media? I definitely think there is in all forms of media, television, newspapers, and radio. I collected some information from surveys that support my claim. “Of the 1400 members of the national media who were surveyed in 1992: 44% considered themselves Democrats, 16% considered themselves Republicans, 34% considered themselves Independents, 89% voted for Clinton in 1992, 7% voted for Bush in 1992.”1 Another survey showed that, “9 White House correspondents voted for Clinton in 1992, while 2 voted for Bush, 12 voted for Dukakis in 1988-one for Bush, 10 voted for Mondale in 1984- 2 for Reagan, 8 voted for Jimmy Carter in 1980 – 2 for Reagan.”2 I am not alone in my opinion about media bias. A poll taken on how Americans also view the media was taken in 1992 and resulted in the fact: “most Americans think that the media is biased. Almost half (49%) think that the media usually doesn’t get the facts straight; two-thirds believe the media doesn’t deal fairly with all sides on social and political reporting; three-fourths of Americans see a fair amount or great deal of political bias in the news, and by more than a 2-to-1 ratio, poll respondents said that bias is liberal rather than conservative (43%-19%). More than 60% of Americans surveyed prefer the media to simply report the facts and not comment on the facts, or offer suggestions about how to solve problems. 65% of Americans polled do not believe that journalists should point out what they believe are inaccuracies and distortions in the statements of public figures; 60% believe the news media has too much influence; 47% think journalists have values different from their own.3 In order for one to determine whether or not reporting is biased, one must determine if the story falls into at least one of the following forms: bias by commission, bias by omission, bias by story selection, bias by placement, bias by the selection of sources, bias by spin, bias by labeling, bias by policy endorsement or condemnation. 4 I am going to discuss some of these categories as well as discuss other matters that support my belief that there is a liberal media bias. I am also going to present the liberals belief that there is not a liberal bias. Bias by commission is a pattern of passing along assumptions or errors that tend to support a position. This is the most common form of bias. It basically states that a reporter must provide roughly equal time to both sides of the issue. If the reporter presents only one perspective or passes along only the “facts” espoused by his/her beliefs without any acknowledgment that others disagree, then he/she has committed bias by commission. “Some examples of “facts” being presented by liberals regarding the Bush/Reagan presidencies were: that the Reagan and Bush Administrations cut funding for social programs (when in fact social spending rose dramatically in both administrations); that the rich grew richer and the poor grew poorer during the Reagan years (when all income groups grew richer); and that there were three million homeless people in the United States (when every reputable study places the number well under one million). 4 Another example of commission bias would be the following. The 1993 debate over Clinton’s budget showed how reporters committed bias by commission by choosing the interpretation of one side. “At the time, Republicans claimed the plan had far more taxes than spending cuts while Democrats insisted the ratio was one-to-one. Some reporters endorsed the Democratic view. A “USA Today” reporter said Clintons’ plan had slightly more spending cuts than tax increases.” A CNN anchor reported the economic package now in the Senate reduces the federal deficit by more than $500 billion dollars with spending cuts and $249 billion in tax increases.”5 I believe that a balanced statement on the issue would sound something like, Democrats claim the deficit package consists of an equal amount of spending cuts and tax increases, while Republicans argue many of the cuts are phony so that there were three dollars in tax hikes for every one dollar in real cuts. Bias by Omission is ignoring the facts that tend to disprove ones core beliefs, or that support the othersides claims. In order for one to catch this form of bias it helps to be knowledgeable about the particular issue that is being discussed. An example of this would be the issue surrounding George W. Bush and the amount of arsenic in our water. At first this issue might sound pretty damming to Bush, since the media portrayed it as though he 86’ed an EPA regulation further limiting the amount of arsenic that could legally be found in America’s drinking water. People now think that he is a madman and is killing innocent people by doing such a thing, most don’t know the whole story. “The National Academy of Sciences issued a report saying that there is too much arsenic in America’s water supply. The EPA follows suit with a new regulation lowering the permissible arsenic in our water supply from 50ppb (parts per billion) to 10 ppb. The water industry states it would cost about $6 billion in immediate capital outlays and about $600 billion a year from then on. That cost would not be an issue if it saved a lot of lives, however, the EPA says that by reducing the arsenic level in water we’re going to statistically save about 28 lives per year. That means it would cost $65 million per life.”6 Thus, proving that Bushs’ decision was rationale, if not justified. Bias by Placement is a pattern of placing news stories so as to downplay information supportive of opposing views. Does a story appear across the top half of the front page, or is it buried in the back? Bias of placement can occur with television or radio news-making a story the lead versus running it 25 minutes into an hour-long newscast. However, it is a lot easier to identify this kind of bias in a newspaper where placing a story on page one versus on the bottom of an inside page makes for a dramatic contrast. An example of bias by placement is: In 1993 “The Washington Post” ran a front page story focusing on a Fairfax County, Virginia Republican Party roast where Oliver North imitated a homosexual calling the White House, complete with lisp. The story focused on how the incident showed Republican “insensitivity” toward a minority group. Condemnation quickly followed, much of it from Virginia Governor Doug Wilder, a Democrat. Yet two months later, “Post” staff writer Donald Baker reported that Wilder donned his own lisp. Responding to a reporter’s question concerning his future marital plans, “the Governor feigned a lisp and a limp wrist in replying, ‘Oh Don, you shouldn’t have.’” While North made Page 1, the “Post” revealed the Wilder incident at the end of Baker’s story on page 7 of the Metro section.7 Another example was a front page headline which read “Quayle’s ‘potatoe’ kid deals with fleeting fame.” This article appeared on the front page (8/8/97) of the Courier Post. It contained information about the sixth grader who was involved in the Dan Quayle potatoe episode on June 1992. It referred to the fact that the boy became a father at the age of 16 and had a 14-month-old daughter who lives with her dad’s family.8 This was not current news, yet it found its way on the front page. It appears to have been done as a further put down of Republicans, at a time when the Republican governor of the state was running for a second term. Bias by spin is emphasizing aspects of a policy favorable to oneside without noting aspects favorable to the other side; putting out the interpretation of what an event means while giving little or no time or space to explaining an opposite interpretation. An example of liberal bias spin would be a poll that was asked concerning George W. Bushs’ effectiveness. It states that the mainstream media was biased towards Bush when seeking “public opinion,” according to a pollster who often tracks voting trends for the Gop. Kellyanne Fitzpatrick, CEO and president of the firm “the polling company,” accuses the segments of the mainstream media of engaging in “egregious questions” weighted on the negative side. Fitzpatrick doesn’t quite go as far as saying that it was push polling, choosing instead to refer to “examples of how the media typifies their political bias against President Bush.” The questions cited by the pollster “appear to be written with a specific intent to portray President Bush in an unfavorable light as well as cast doubt on his presidency in its infancy. An example of a loaded question that was asked by CBS news was, “Given that a majority of voters did NOT vote for George W. Bush, do you think it will be harder for him to accomplish his goals as president, or won’t it make a difference?”9 Another example would be: “A CNN/USA Today poll out on 8/14/97 has headlines that stated “More Americans Want Jones vs. Clinton Settled Out Of Court” based on a poll that 48% to 42% were in favor of an out of court settlement. The poll had a 3.5% margin of error, which gives the poll a 2.5% edge in favor of settling out of court. This does not justify the headline. It is basically a dead heat.10 Another form of media bias is how the press intervies political candidates. I found a great deal of interviews where the Liberal candidate was asked very easy questions and the Republican candidate was asked very incriminating questions or assumed an answer in how it was stated. An example of this would be how Barbara Walters interviewed Bob Dole/Liddy Dole in comparison to Bill Clinton/Hillary Clinton. When interviewing Dole, Barbara Walters asked him about the breakup of his first marriage and whether politics contributed to it. The question was designed to remind the American audience about his divorce and marital problems. It was also an attempt to dig up some dirt if there was any. I thought that the question was completely fair, however, only if the similar question was asked of Bill/Hillary Clinton. One would think that since such a private issue was raised with Dole, it would be raised with Clinton; it wasn’t. She could have and never did ask Clinton about his 12-year adulterous affair with Gennifer Flowers, the Paula Jones sexual harassment suit, or his alleged illegitimate child. Then Barbara Walters asked Liddy Dole, how she could, as the president of the Red Cross, dare accept financial contributions from tobacco companies, and demanded to know whether she would cut off such contributions. Again, this was a fair and tough question, but once again she avoided asking Hillary the same type of questions. She didn’t ask her about her attempts to defame travel office employees, institute false criminal actions against Bobby Dale so her cronies could be put in and why she appointed Craig Livingstone as head of the White House Security, or anything about the missing Whitewater. Accordingly, during this interview Barbara Walters demonstrated a form of liberal bias, by attacking the Doles but not asking any tough questions of the Clintons.11 I believe the major networks NBC, ABC, and CBS have played major roles in presenting a liberal media bias. They hide negative stories that surface regarding the Democratic Party, yet are quick to release damaging stories and allegations surrounding the Republican Party. An example of this would be during the 1996 Presidential campaign. As the campaign was coming to an end, the Dole camp knew it would be difficult to defeat an incumbent president running on a strong economy, so they counted heavily on trying to expose the unethical nature of the Clinton administration. Unlike economics or crime, government ethics is something the public cannot experience directly. Voters most rely on the media for such information. The facts about the Clinton administration’s ethics or lack thereof took a fiery turn in late September. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, having legal documents found in Hillary Clinton’s living quarters, determined tht they wre used by James McDougal and his savings and loan to commit federal fraud. The report confirmed why the White House had balked at giving the documents to investigators. But the 60 million potential voters who get their news from NBC, ABC, and CBS never heard the news. The FDIC story was ignored. So too was the Senate testimony of White House employee Marie Anderson, who confirmed that, the contary to the testimony of her former colleagues Craig Livingstone and Anthony Marceca, they knew they were accessing the files of former Bush administration officials. “Had the media simply become bored with Washington ethics stories? Hardly. During the same period they were ignoring the FDIC and Filegate stories, the networks were airing 11 stories on the House investigation into Gingrich’s ethics.”12 Liberals often say that Conservatives often promote the myth that the U.S. media is liberal, without any concrete evidence. They say the myth serves several purposes, such as, it raises public skepticism about liberal news stories, hides conservative bias when it appears, and goads the media to the right. They claim that since conservatives have powerful friends in the media: the corporations that own them, and the corporations that pay for their advertising. These large firms have been increasingly successful in bending the media’s message to suit their selfintrests, which include a conservative and pro-corporate agenda. Liberals claim that the media is silent on the issues most important to workers consumes and other citizens adversely affected by corporate behavior.13I think I have proven my claim that there is a liberal media bias with the information I had given prior. Objectivity goes to the heart of professional journalism. And journalism is at the heart of information in a democracy. I don’t think the major news media has been consistently objective, but consistently partisan players. A bias media will not determine the outcome of an election, but it can affect the information voters need to make a democratic choice. Bibliography:

Word Count: 2369