|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 4:25 pm Post subject: So, media has a liberal bias? |
 |
|
Not on radio. Here's what people with the ability to be objective already knew:
| Quote: |
As this report will document in detail, conservative talk radio undeniably dominates the format:
* Our analysis in the spring of 2007 of the 257 news/talk stations owned by the top five commercial station owners reveals that 91 percent of the total weekday talk radio programming is conservative, and 9 percent is progressive.
* Each weekday, 2,570 hours and 15 minutes of conservative talk are broadcast on these stations compared to 254 hours of progressive talk�10 times as much conservative talk as progressive talk.
* A separate analysis of all of the news/talk stations in the top 10 radio markets reveals that 76 percent of the programming in these markets is conservative and 24 percent is progressive, although programming is more balanced in markets such as New York and Chicago.
...Our conclusion is that the gap between conservative and progressive talk radio is the result of multiple structural problems in the U.S. regulatory system, particularly the complete breakdown of the public trustee concept of broadcast, the elimination of clear public interest requirements for broadcasting, and the relaxation of ownership rules including the requirement of local participation in management.
Ownership diversity is perhaps the single most important variable contributing to the structural imbalance based on the data...
...stations controlled by group owners�those with stations in multiple markets or more than three stations in a single market�were statistically more likely to air conservative talk...
The disparities between conservative and progressive programming reflect the absence of localism in American radio markets... |
Solutions:
| Quote: |
This analysis suggests that any effort to encourage more responsive and balanced radio programming will first require steps to increase localism and diversify radio station ownership to better meet local and community needs. We suggest three ways to accomplish this:
* Restore local and national caps on the ownership of commercial radio stations.
* Ensure greater local accountability over radio licensing.
* Require commercial owners who fail to abide by enforceable public interest obligations to pay a fee to support public broadcasting. |
Story link
Full report |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
enns
Joined: 02 May 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Oh talk radio has always leaned conservative while print and television has always leaned left. With the amount of studies out on both(check my old post s for links), this should be common knowledge about now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The selection of categories: "conservative" and "progressive" by itself shows that the study was biased from the outset. Worthless.
Calling the media "liberal" or "conservative" is equally out of touch with reality. 19th century political spectrum analysis is about as useful as turning a map of the world on its edge and talking about the "east/west" spectrum and trying to plot countries, cities etc. in one dimension. We need to use at least a two dimensional mapping system like we use for simple geography. Using more dimensions can be more interesting, but quickly exceeds the capacity of most people to comprehend.
In reality, the broadcast media tends to be pro big government. This included the early TV talk shows such as Phil Donohue. TV was historically so tightly controlled by the FCC that the lawyers in charge at the big stations and networks wouldn't allow any significant controversy that might arouse the ire of the government. Many stations and networks were threatened with loss of their licenses for opposing government policies or powerful politicians. Some stations lost their licenses for speaking out.
Talk radio exploded onto the scene as a response and tended to be anti big government. This coincided with an era of anti government hostility in the US and the government was in fear that further repression on its part could lead to violence by many armed anti government groups. So, the government had to loosen its grip on this area of the broadcast media, slightly.
Without the second amendment, the first amendment would have been totally lost by now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 6:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ontheway wrote: |
The selection of categories: "conservative" and "progressive" by itself shows that the study was biased from the outset. Worthless.
Calling the media "liberal" or "conservative" is equally out of touch with reality. 19th century political spectrum analysis is about as useful as turning a map of the world on its edge and talking about the "east/west" spectrum and trying to plot countries, cities etc. in one dimension. We need to use at least a two dimensional mapping system like we use for simple geography. Using more dimensions can be more interesting, but quickly exceeds the capacity of most people to comprehend. |
Nice claim. This seems to be another knee-jerk reaction to the poster, not the content. Any back-up for your contention? After all, any claim that any said study means nothing because it doesn't have the parameters you want is also bunk. There is something to be gleaned from any study. Even poor studies teach us something, no?
You didn't read the PDF, right? If you had, you might have noticed this:
| Quote: |
| Hosts were categorized as conservative, progressive/liberal, or indeterminate/neither based on self-identification, show descriptions, and listings in Talkers Magazine (See Appendix B). Only hosts with evident and near-indisputable leanings were categorized. |
The last sentence first struck me as a little strange, then I realized it would be filled with middle-of-the-roaders, thus not germaine. It would be interesting to know how many of those there were.
This is particularly telling. The top five owners would cover large percentage of audience.
| Quote: |
The analysis of the political talk programming on the 257 news/talk stations owned by the five largest commercial station owners reveals the following:
91 percent of the political talk radio programming on the stations owned by the top five commercial station owners is conservative, and 9 percent is progressive.
2,570 hours and 15 minutes of conservative talk radio are broadcast each weekday on these stations compared to 254 hours of progressive talk.
92 percent of these stations (236 stations out of 257) do not broadcast a single minute of progressive talk radio programming. |
Given that so many conservatives still believe such crap as Al Queda and Iraq conspired on 9/11, Libby didn't break any laws, wiretapping is not illegal, etc., etc., we need to be concerned about the effects of corporate-owned media. I wouldn't mind so much if people held opinions based on reality, e.g. wiretapping is illegal and the current administration broke the law, but it was a necessary evil, but they are believing lies spread by the con media. Thus, they do not understand the assault on our freedoms, which is the most dangerous shift for us. It is far more dangerous than Al Queda could ever hope to be.
Last edited by EFLtrainer on Fri Jun 22, 2007 8:31 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| enns wrote: |
| Oh talk radio has always leaned conservative while print and television has always leaned left. With the amount of studies out on both(check my old post s for links), this should be common knowledge about now. |
The study is primarily useful perhaps because you hear constant propaganda from the neo-con/right about the liberal bias. You rarely hear that from the "liberals" except to refute the freakin "cons." If the cons are gonna keep plugging away at the lie, it needs to be refuted.
There is a bit of a dust-up right now with regard to con comments about the power of con radio.
The research is quite timely in that regard. The study looked at the issue from a wide variety of angles and measures, which lends validity to the findings. Perhaps more importantly, this isn't a "lean" it's massively out of balance. A point of concern. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enns
Joined: 02 May 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't necessarily disagree with the findings but I do disagree with the title of this thread. The label "media" goes beyond simply radio; you need to include both television and print. I think an argument could be made that tv and newspapers are both utilized more than radio as a means for information. Both of these are left-wing. People tend not to search for news in talk radio like they do in newspapers and television. I don't think many centrist or left-of-centre citizens tune into Rush Limbaugh to obtain their news for the day.
These findings don't shed much new light on this subject. Overall, the media is still left-wing. The right-wing radio is purposed to provide a semblance of balance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| enns wrote: |
| I don't necessarily disagree with the findings but I do disagree with the title of this thread. The label "media" goes beyond simply radio; you need to include both television and print. |
Context is everything. The title points to the fact that, like you below, too many claim "media" is liberal. After complaining about the title, you do the same thing. You don't feel the need to clarify; do I really need to? No. When you read the piece you understand perfectly what it is about. There is no possibility of confusion.
| Quote: |
| I think an argument could be made that tv and newspapers are both utilized more than radio as a means for information. Both of these are left-wing. |
Bull. People like to use old studies as an indication of what is happening currently. It does not apply. Period. The evidence is compelling that media has been very, very conservative since the early 90's
| Quote: |
People tend not to search for news in talk radio like they do in newspapers and television...
These findings don't shed much new light on this subject. Overall, the media is still left-wing. The right-wing radio is purposed to provide a semblance of balance. |
Uh-huh. That's why the last six years have seen nearly ZERO holding to account by the media??
You listen to too much talk radio, apparently.
Point me to the best of your liberal bias sources, eh? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enns
Joined: 02 May 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What are you talking about? Any study, recent or not, on newspapers and tv have indicated a left-wing bias, I can point to three independent studies since 2000(and have previously). Give some evidence to support your claim that the media as a whole is conservative(right-wing). I just don't understand where you're coming from. You can't just state something because you want to believe it.
For the record, I have never listened to any American talk radio, so I can't really comment on it other than I've heard it's right-wing. I'm willing to accept this. I've only listened to CBC radio, hardly a right-wing mouth piece.
I accept where a right-wing bias exists(talk radio, foxnews, etc.), why can't you accept where a left-wing bias exists? I just don't understand where you're coming from.
Check out my old post to read up on the studies, if all three prove to be bogus then let's have a serious discussion:
http://forums.eslcafe.com/korea/viewtopic.php?p=1150532&highlight=#1150532 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 10:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| enns wrote: |
| What are you talking about? Any study, recent or not, on newspapers and tv have indicated a left-wing bias, I can point to three independent studies since 2000(and have previously). Give some evidence to support your claim that the media as a whole is conservative(right-wing). I just don't understand where you're coming from. You can't just state something because you want to believe it. |
Well, same goes for you, eh? Studies during and after the Clinton administration showed a very definite bias to the conservative side. It showed in numbers of articles, the percentages of negative and positive articles, etc.
As for current times, have you just been ignoring the great deal of discussion about the media abdicating it's Fourth Estate role since 9/11?
Thanks. Will do.
EDIT: Had a look and it is as I expected: You are using studies from 2002 and older to state, "The media HAS a liberal bias."
Sorry. That's not going to fly. There has been consolidation since then, there has been the rise of Fox since then, etc. Get me studies that cover 2000 - present. Nothing you cited would cover post-9/11.
Oh, and the one from fairly recent was.... an opinion, not a study. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 11:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've tried to find some recent studies, but can find only partisan sources. This, however, illustrates my point:
http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=NC&pubid=1412
| Quote: |
| Philip Meyer, the Knight Professor at the University of North Carolina, wrote recently about a study made by two professors at the University of Connecticut who surveyed high school students in 2004 and 2006 and made a disturbing discovery. Most of the students knew that the Constitution�s First Amendment guaranteed freedom of religion, speech, and press as well as the right to peaceably assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Among almost 15,000 students surveyed in 2006, 55 percent thought the First Amendment went too far in granting rights, according to Meyer, which was a swing from majority support for those rights in 2004. Meyer wrote that the researchers, Kenneth Dautrich and David Yalof, have long studied attitudes toward the First Amendment and believe that the reason for the change in views is the debate over liberty versus national security. |
It there truly were a liberal bias, would this even be possible? To know what a thing is, look at what it produces. The above is what the "media" produced between 2004 and 2006. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enns
Joined: 02 May 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Is this all you have to support your claim? That hardly is a smoking gun.
My studies are focused and credible. Anything past 2000 should suffice, most of the journalists, editors, and broadcasters haven't changed positions. However, if you still want more, here is something from a few days ago.
| Quote: |
| If you're at all interested in the Great Media Bias Debate - and if you're here, there's a decent chance you are - you've probably seen MSNBC's report about journalists contributing to political campaigns. In a development that should shock precisely no one, 125 of the 144 journos identified gave to "Democrats and liberal causes," while only 17 gave to Republicans. (Two gave to both parties.) |
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2007/06/21/publiceye/entry2963110.shtml
I found this in 1 minute on google, it isn't difficult to find evidence supporting the notion of a liberal media. And this one is from MSNBC, hardly a right-wing outlet.
Any way you look at it, there is far more credible evidence to support a liberal media than there is to support a conservative one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wangja
Joined: 17 May 2004
Location: Seoul, Yongsan
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I am not al all sure many in USA know what "left" means. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wangja wrote: |
| I am not al all sure many in USA know what "left" means. |
Let me guess: "Left" has a universal meaning and is defined in Greenwich. ROFL. The arrogance of Eurocentrism knows no bounds.
We do not take our cue from European politics, Wangja. We have never gone as far left as you have, nor as far right. We know that, in your context, Marx and Lenin defined "the left," while Mussolini, Franco, and Hitler definied "the right." The Romanovs and Louis XIV defined "absolutism": "L'�tat, c'est moi." And the French Revolution defined the polar opposite of that. Europeans, from Hern�n Cort�s to Leopold defined "imperialism" and illustrated its brutal excesses. The Portuguese refined "slavery" into its modern, capitalist form. And de Gualle reminded us just how "nationalist" Europeans can be. Perhaps Americans might ask whether many in EU know what "moderation" means.
In any case, yes: for the large part, and since the 1970s, European worldviews notwithstanding, the American media tends to lean to the left. For every Rush Limbaugh, there are ten Anderson Coopers and Keith Olbermanns. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wangja
Joined: 17 May 2004
Location: Seoul, Yongsan
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 1:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Wangja wrote: |
| I am not al all sure many in USA know what "left" means. |
Let me guess: "Left" has a universal meaning and is defined in Greenwich. ROFL. The arrogance of Eurocentrism knows no bounds.
We do not take our cue from European politics, Wangja. We have never gone as far left as you have, nor as far right. We know that, in your context, Marx and Lenin defined "the left," while Mussolini, Franco, and Hitler definied "the right." The Romanovs and Louis XIV defined "absolutism": "L'�tat, c'est moi." And the French Revolution defined the polar opposite of that. Europeans, from Hern�n Cort�s to Leopold defined "imperialism" and illustrated its brutal excesses. The Portuguese refined "slavery" into its modern, capitalist form. And de Gualle reminded us just how "nationalist" Europeans can be. Perhaps Americans might ask whether many in EU know what "moderation" means.
In any case, yes: for the large part, and since the 1970s, European worldviews notwithstanding, the American media tends to lean to the left. For every Rush Limbaugh, there are ten Anderson Coopers and Keith Olbermanns. |
Glad to have amused you again Mr G.
BTW, your Jaco avatar was far superior ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wangja
Joined: 17 May 2004
Location: Seoul, Yongsan
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
