It's interesting that so many attribute the high percentage of negative coverage to political bias. Just an odd leap to make.
UVA Declines White House Invitation
- Thread starter Hank_
- Start date
- Status
It's interesting that so many attribute the high percentage of negative coverage to political bias. Just an odd leap to make.
It was a quick observation. You snowflaked over it and still are. That I've had to repeat it b/c you're too triggered to listen is not a sign that I'm any more worked up than the first time I called you on your contradiction.
Is it? I don't think it is, at all. It's pretty widely known and has been for a long time the main stream media has a liberal bias. I would argue thinking otherwise is an odd leap to make, not rooted in reality.
Not when there are a lot of good things happening that are purposely not getting coverage. It's not a leap at all. They spent the past two and a half years misleading the public over what Muller was finding. Now that they have egg on their faces, they're misleading the public over obstruction while attempting to make Barr look like a liar. Trump could grab a girl as she was falling off a cliff and the headlines would be, "Trump touches girl inappropriately without her consent."
To act like the media is not politically biased is loony. Both sides.
But the studies in this area have shown liberal bias is slight. It's not an overwhelming bias that would even approach accounting for 90% negative coverage (assuming this is an accurate number). So why is there such a big disparity between bias and negative coverage?
Think of the girl in high school who always seems to have drama with other girls who she insists are just jealous or haters. Are they haters cuz they just like to hate or does she suck? She probably sucks.
MSNBC and Fox swing to opposite ends of the spectrum intentionally but the others consistently come pretty close to the middle in their coverage. There's liberal bias but the GOP propoganda machine has apparently done a good job of convincing their followers that it's significantly more pervasive than what the data actually shows.
After all your bluster you went with "I know you are, but what am I?"
You're slipping...
There is nothing resembling the middle on cnn, cbs, abc or even most major newspapers. If you have data that says differently, I want to see who gathered it and what the criteria is.
Brooky---CNN is far from being in the middle. If you meant it sits in the middle of extreme left and run of the mill liberal---you'd be correct.
I'm not sure what good criteria and citations are when you are likely to dismiss that as biased, too, but okay: Media Bias Fact Check.
ABC, CBS, and NBC are all listed as "Left-Center." That would qualify as "resembling the middle." CNN and MSNBC are both listed as "Left." For comparison, Forbes and WSJ are listed as "Right-Center" and Fox News is "Right." Gallup, Pew, C-Span, Reuters, AP, and a whole bunch of local media are called "Least Biased."
90% of the major TV coverage is negative about Trump. Only Fox News is pro trump.
Bias and negative coverage are not the same thing.
Making up a percentage doesn't actually qualify as fact.
I suspect it's primarily Fox News that is telling everyone the others are so biased. The cognitive dissonance is strong.
You are one of those lefties that prefer the country fails if it means getting Trump out of office. Whoopie Goldberg hated Trump so much she said if he was elected she was moving to Canada. Guess what she is still here running her mouth. Fake news again.
Evidently you can't read. I was wrong. It is 92%.
Media Trump Hatred Shows In 92% Negative Coverage Of His Presidency: Study
Media Trump Hatred Shows In 92% Negative Coverage Of His Presidency: Study
To say that the big networks haven't exactly had a love affair with Donald Trump, as they plainly did with President Obama, is an understatement. A new survey shows that not only is coverage of Trump overwhelmingly negative, but the president's biggest accomplishment — the roaring economy — gets almost no attention.
01:00
01:00
For its report, the Media Research Center did a lot of visual spadework. It viewed some 1,007 evening news stories about the Trump White House on ABC, CBS and NBC from June 1 to Sept. 30. That's the equivalent of about 32.7 hours of coverage, by TV standards an eternity of news time.
What they found was, as Trump himself might say, sad: "Over the summer, the broadcast networks have continued to pound Donald Trump and his team with the most hostile coverage of a president in TV news history — 92% negative, vs. just 8% positive."
To say that the big networks haven't exactly had a love affair with Donald Trump, as they plainly did with President Obama, is an understatement. A new survey shows that not only is coverage of Trump overwhelmingly negative, but the president's biggest accomplishment — the roaring economy — gets almost no attention.
01:00
01:00
For its report, the Media Research Center did a lot of visual spadework. It viewed some 1,007 evening news stories about the Trump White House on ABC, CBS and NBC from June 1 to Sept. 30. That's the equivalent of about 32.7 hours of coverage, by TV standards an eternity of news time.
What they found was, as Trump himself might say, sad: "Over the summer, the broadcast networks have continued to pound Donald Trump and his team with the most hostile coverage of a president in TV news history — 92% negative, vs. just 8% positive."
And your headline -- "Media Trump Hatred Shows In 92% Negative Coverage Of His Presidency: Study" -- is from an editorial on a right-wing site citing research by a right-wing research group. lol
As brooky said, negative coverage is not necessarily biased coverage.
As brooky said, negative coverage is not necessarily biased coverage.
Uh... it hurts you. You're citing a source whose very existence is for the predetermined purpose of "exposing and combating liberal media bias." You're putting it out there as objective fact.
Good---I don't feel like it either, nor do I care enough to be proven right or wrong. I think I just find a lot of biased opinion masquerading as news distasteful. And for every guilty liberal slant you can find its counterpart across the aisle.
Last edited:
I am not seeing anything that really contradicts my point. Is it because they label abc, cbs and nbc as left center? Again, criteria is important. If they are basing it off of time spent on certain topics, that is a vague way of doing it. I base it off of my experiences with the news. I will watch The Five and maybe some of the weekend Fox and Friends. But basically the only news I watch is NBC nightly news. They may be labeled left center, but their snarkiness is obvious. My new favorite Trump quote is the young and vibrant comment. He was clearly bullshitting and being funny, but Lester Holt felt like he needed to explain to us that Biden is only 4 years older and is in better shape. That is pitty, I admit. But it just shows you how ridiculously biased against Trump the media is.
It is objective fact. Here is a study by the very liberal Harvard University:
Harvard released a study last week that analyzed The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post and the main newscasts on CBS, CNN, Fox and NBC during Mr. Trump’s first 100 days. No shocker here: 80 percent was negative, just 20 percent positive.
If you are told that every media outlet falls on a spectrum between 1 (liberal) and 100 (conservative), and 90% of media outlets were between 44 and 49, then you could say that 90% of the media outlets skew liberal. But that only tells you the direction and not the magnitude. This failure to incorporate both direction and magnitude is echoed by people on the right complaining that the media skews liberal. To wit:
"nothing resembling the middle" is bumper sticker level BS, of course, and for the very reason discussed above (of course it also insinuates that everything about media bias is based on R v D politics, which is far from reality, and ignores that corporate media has a built in corporate bias, but I'm trying to keep it simple here).
What actual data have shown is that media sources fall on a scale, with the (generally) more reputable sources skewing around the center on both sides:
So there's a spectrum to the biases of all media outlets (which is itself an oversimplification), which is more useful and accurate than claiming that anything left of center is in the same liberal slop pail and anything right of center is in the same conservative piss trough.
And people crying about "MSM" media bias tend to focus solely on certain types of media outlets and not others, specifically talk radio and "alternative" online media:
The "only" modifier there applies to TV, but not other sources. Of course the reality is that such sources are dominated by the right in both frequency and magnitude. See, e.g., Forbes, CAP, PEW.
In fact, what we see is that when people have the option they tend to self select to the media source that fits their biases. For example, consistently conservative people tend to exist in bubble more than consistently liberal people, but their habits are closer to each other than to people in the middle.
Not only are you creating strawman arguments ("prefer the country fails"), but you misused the term "fake news." Cool.
That is b/c he says or tweets stupid sht constantly. If he had any restraint or composure, it would be a different story and more of the positives would be the focus. With that being said, many of the dumba$$es he has surrounded himself have been at fault and haven’t helped Trump at all. Their jobs are to make his life easier, but nearly all of them have done the opposite.
Well, I can see for myself. Which to be fair, I don't spend my time watching news networks trying to see who is more biased. I only have a limited amount of viewership. So I will rephrase what I was saying to say: to my knowledge and experience, those networks I listed do not resemble anything close to the middle. That would make a long and stupid bumper sticker, btw.
If you're just basing it off your own observations, there's no point in asking us to substantiate anything.
This highlights the reason why arguments built on anecdotal evidence are inherently flawed.
- Status
Similar threads
