Fawkin'Injun
Off da Reservation!
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2003
- Posts
- 10,402
Wednesday, Nov.12, 2003
Scholars' Study Nails Media Bias
Bernard Goldberg, author of the best-selling expose of the media's leftward tilt, "Bias," and his new shocker, "Arrogance," was right on targegt when he noted that the media regularly label Republicans as conservatives but seldom describe Democrats as liberals, say two scholars who studied the records of the New York Times and the Washington Post.
Writing in today's Wall Street Journal, David Brady, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and professor of political science at Stanford, and Jonathan Ma, a senior in economics at Stanford, revealed the results of their study of New York Times and Washington Post articles published between 1990 and 2002, which showed that the problem of biased identification of liberal and conservative senators is "endemic."
Explaining that Goldberg had written that during the Clinton impeachment trial, Peter Jennings "consistently labeled Republican loyalists as 'conservatives' or 'very determined conservatives'" while not referring to "Democratic loyalists as 'liberals'" and instead treating Clinton's allies as mainstream lawmakers, the two scholars asked themselves if the media's tendency to label particular senators was isolated to the Clinton impeachment trial, "Or is there a more pernicious generality?"
The answer, they learned, was a resounding "yes."
When there were policy issues at stake, they discovered, conservative senators earn "conservative" labels from Times reporters more often than liberal senators receive "liberal" labels.
During the 102nd Congress, the Times labeled liberal senators as "liberal" in 3.87 percent of the stories in which they were mentioned. In contrast, the 10 most conservative senators were identified as "conservative" in 9.03 percent of the stories in which they were mentioned, nearly three times the rate for liberal senators.
Over the course of six congressional sessions, the labeling of conservative senators in the Washington Post and New York Times occurred at a rate of two, three, four and even five times as often as that of liberal senators
Times reporters often inject comments that present liberals in a more favorable light than conservatives. For instance, during the 102nd Congress, Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa was described in Times stories as "a kindred liberal Democrat from Iowa," a "respected Midwestern liberal" and "a good old-fashioned liberal." Fellow Democrat Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts received neutral, if not benign, identification: "a liberal spokesman" and "the party's old-school liberal."
On the other hand, Times reporters described conservative senators as belligerent and extreme. During the 102nd Congress, Sen. Jesse Helms was labeled as "the most unyielding conservative," "the unyielding conservative Republican," "the contentious conservative" and "the Republican arch-conservative." During this time period, Times reporters made a point to specifically identify Sen. Malcolm Wallop of Wyoming and Sen. Robert C. Smith of New Hampshire as "very conservative" and Sen. Don Nickles of Oklahoma as "one of the most conservative elected officials in America."
Liberal senators were granted near immunity from any disparaging remarks regarding their ideological position: Sen. Harkin is "a liberal intellectual"; Sen. Barbara Boxer of California is "a reliably outspoken liberal"; Sen. Paul Simon of Illinois is "a respected Midwestern liberal"; Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York is "difficult to categorize politically"; Sen. Kennedy is "a liberal icon" and "liberal abortion rights stalwart"; and Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg of New Jersey is a man whose "politics are liberal to moderate."
Descriptions of conservative senators, however, included "unyielding," "hard-line" and "firebrand." According to the Times during the period of 1990-2000: Sen. Nickles was "a fierce conservative" and "a rock-ribbed conservative"; Sen. Helms is "perhaps the most tenacious and quarrelsome conservative in the Senate, and with his "right-wing isolationist ideology" he is the "best-known mischief maker." Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona is "a Republican hard-liner"; Sen. Robert C. Smith is "a granite-hard Republican conservative"; Sen. Gramm takes "aggressively conservative stands" and has "touched on many red-meat conservative topics," as "the highly partisan conservative Texan"; Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas is "hard-core conservative," "considerably more conservative ... less pragmatic," "hard-line conservative ... one of Newt Gingrich's foot soldiers," and "a hard-charging conservative"; Sen. Tim Hutchinson of Arkansas is "a staunch conservative"; and Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho is "an arch-conservative."
The liberal Washington Post did its share of biases labeling.
According to the Post, in the 107th Congress, Sen. Paul Sarbanes of Maryland was described as "one of the more liberal senators but [with] a record of working with Republicans." Sen. Harkin was bathed in bipartisan light: "a prairie populist with a generally liberal record, although he's made a few detours to more conservative positions demanded by his Iowa constituents." Of Carol Moseley-Braun of Illinois, the Post said: "Though a liberal at heart, she is more pragmatic than ideological." Other liberals were lionized or cast in soft focus: "Sen. Kennedy is a hero to liberals and a major irritant to conservatives, plus an old-style liberal appeal to conscience"; Sen. Paul Wellstone of Minnesota "was one of the few unabashed liberals left on Capitol Hill and an ebullient liberal"; Sen. Moynihan was "a liberal public intellectual."
In contrast, the Post portrayed conservative senators unflatteringly. Republican loyalists were often labeled as hostile and out of the mainstream. In the 107th Congress, Senators Gramm and Nickles were dismissed as a "conservative Texan" and "conservative Oklahoman," respectively. Post reporters regarded Sen. Smith as an idiosyncratic conservative, militantly conservative, and a conservative man in a conservative suit from the conservative state of New Hampshire. Other Republicans were characterized as antagonists: Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma is "a hard-line GOP conservative"; Sen. Kyl is "a combative conservative"; Sen. Helms is "a cantankerous, deeply conservative chairman," "a Clinton-bashing conservative," "the crusty senator from North Carolina," "the longtime keeper of the conservative flame," and "a conservative curmudgeon."
The two concluded that "conservative senators, consistently portrayed as spoilers, are ill-served by the political reporting in two of the leading general-interest newspapers of the United States. Liberals, on the other hand, get a free pass. If this is not bias, pray what is?
Scholars' Study Nails Media Bias
Bernard Goldberg, author of the best-selling expose of the media's leftward tilt, "Bias," and his new shocker, "Arrogance," was right on targegt when he noted that the media regularly label Republicans as conservatives but seldom describe Democrats as liberals, say two scholars who studied the records of the New York Times and the Washington Post.
Writing in today's Wall Street Journal, David Brady, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and professor of political science at Stanford, and Jonathan Ma, a senior in economics at Stanford, revealed the results of their study of New York Times and Washington Post articles published between 1990 and 2002, which showed that the problem of biased identification of liberal and conservative senators is "endemic."
Explaining that Goldberg had written that during the Clinton impeachment trial, Peter Jennings "consistently labeled Republican loyalists as 'conservatives' or 'very determined conservatives'" while not referring to "Democratic loyalists as 'liberals'" and instead treating Clinton's allies as mainstream lawmakers, the two scholars asked themselves if the media's tendency to label particular senators was isolated to the Clinton impeachment trial, "Or is there a more pernicious generality?"
The answer, they learned, was a resounding "yes."
When there were policy issues at stake, they discovered, conservative senators earn "conservative" labels from Times reporters more often than liberal senators receive "liberal" labels.
During the 102nd Congress, the Times labeled liberal senators as "liberal" in 3.87 percent of the stories in which they were mentioned. In contrast, the 10 most conservative senators were identified as "conservative" in 9.03 percent of the stories in which they were mentioned, nearly three times the rate for liberal senators.
Over the course of six congressional sessions, the labeling of conservative senators in the Washington Post and New York Times occurred at a rate of two, three, four and even five times as often as that of liberal senators
Times reporters often inject comments that present liberals in a more favorable light than conservatives. For instance, during the 102nd Congress, Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa was described in Times stories as "a kindred liberal Democrat from Iowa," a "respected Midwestern liberal" and "a good old-fashioned liberal." Fellow Democrat Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts received neutral, if not benign, identification: "a liberal spokesman" and "the party's old-school liberal."
On the other hand, Times reporters described conservative senators as belligerent and extreme. During the 102nd Congress, Sen. Jesse Helms was labeled as "the most unyielding conservative," "the unyielding conservative Republican," "the contentious conservative" and "the Republican arch-conservative." During this time period, Times reporters made a point to specifically identify Sen. Malcolm Wallop of Wyoming and Sen. Robert C. Smith of New Hampshire as "very conservative" and Sen. Don Nickles of Oklahoma as "one of the most conservative elected officials in America."
Liberal senators were granted near immunity from any disparaging remarks regarding their ideological position: Sen. Harkin is "a liberal intellectual"; Sen. Barbara Boxer of California is "a reliably outspoken liberal"; Sen. Paul Simon of Illinois is "a respected Midwestern liberal"; Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York is "difficult to categorize politically"; Sen. Kennedy is "a liberal icon" and "liberal abortion rights stalwart"; and Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg of New Jersey is a man whose "politics are liberal to moderate."
Descriptions of conservative senators, however, included "unyielding," "hard-line" and "firebrand." According to the Times during the period of 1990-2000: Sen. Nickles was "a fierce conservative" and "a rock-ribbed conservative"; Sen. Helms is "perhaps the most tenacious and quarrelsome conservative in the Senate, and with his "right-wing isolationist ideology" he is the "best-known mischief maker." Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona is "a Republican hard-liner"; Sen. Robert C. Smith is "a granite-hard Republican conservative"; Sen. Gramm takes "aggressively conservative stands" and has "touched on many red-meat conservative topics," as "the highly partisan conservative Texan"; Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas is "hard-core conservative," "considerably more conservative ... less pragmatic," "hard-line conservative ... one of Newt Gingrich's foot soldiers," and "a hard-charging conservative"; Sen. Tim Hutchinson of Arkansas is "a staunch conservative"; and Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho is "an arch-conservative."
The liberal Washington Post did its share of biases labeling.
According to the Post, in the 107th Congress, Sen. Paul Sarbanes of Maryland was described as "one of the more liberal senators but [with] a record of working with Republicans." Sen. Harkin was bathed in bipartisan light: "a prairie populist with a generally liberal record, although he's made a few detours to more conservative positions demanded by his Iowa constituents." Of Carol Moseley-Braun of Illinois, the Post said: "Though a liberal at heart, she is more pragmatic than ideological." Other liberals were lionized or cast in soft focus: "Sen. Kennedy is a hero to liberals and a major irritant to conservatives, plus an old-style liberal appeal to conscience"; Sen. Paul Wellstone of Minnesota "was one of the few unabashed liberals left on Capitol Hill and an ebullient liberal"; Sen. Moynihan was "a liberal public intellectual."
In contrast, the Post portrayed conservative senators unflatteringly. Republican loyalists were often labeled as hostile and out of the mainstream. In the 107th Congress, Senators Gramm and Nickles were dismissed as a "conservative Texan" and "conservative Oklahoman," respectively. Post reporters regarded Sen. Smith as an idiosyncratic conservative, militantly conservative, and a conservative man in a conservative suit from the conservative state of New Hampshire. Other Republicans were characterized as antagonists: Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma is "a hard-line GOP conservative"; Sen. Kyl is "a combative conservative"; Sen. Helms is "a cantankerous, deeply conservative chairman," "a Clinton-bashing conservative," "the crusty senator from North Carolina," "the longtime keeper of the conservative flame," and "a conservative curmudgeon."
The two concluded that "conservative senators, consistently portrayed as spoilers, are ill-served by the political reporting in two of the leading general-interest newspapers of the United States. Liberals, on the other hand, get a free pass. If this is not bias, pray what is?
......short enough
