7% of journalists are Republican

[StLucieBengal]

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/8/republicans-media-bias-claims-boosted-by-scarcity-/

And we wonder why we can't get out the truth about our candidates.

[Benton]

Couple three things.

1- This is about book sales. Which sounds more likely to sell books — demonizing journalists as mostly liberal followers who can't help themselves and skew the public, or the vanilla fact of life that most journalists are as varied as most people in any occupation and contain a likewise amount of conservatives?

2- If they were an overwhelming majority of one party, why the assumption they can't do their job of reporting independently? I don't get that mental stumble in people. It's the same as saying liberal cops only arrest conservatives, conservative doctors only really try to save GOPers, or Green Party pilots are less likely to fly planes if Republicans and Democrats are on board.

3- What really matters (and going off point 2) is from your link:

Quote:In his study Mr. Groseclose measured the mainstream press on a 0-to-100 point scale, with 100 being the most liberal, like a speech from Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and 50 being centrist. The media tended to come in at 60 — still not neutral, but not so slanted as some conservatives claim.

Which if I had to guess as to the reason, it's because we're coming out of a recent time were more liberal events were taking place. In other words, the media appeared to be more liberal because more liberal activity was going on.

[fredtoast]

(11-09-2015, 03:48 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/8/republicans-media-bias-claims-boosted-by-scarcity-/

And we wonder why we can't get out the truth about our candidates.

 "If you look at where people’s opinions are, they are in the middle, so that’s where a lot of reporting goes because that’s where the eyeballs go,” he said.

Mr. D’Alessio argues that for every liberal news network like MSNBC, there’s a Fox News counterpoint because the market creates that opening. For The Huffington Post online, there’s the Drudge Report online, and for The New York Times there’s the New York Post.


But overall, he says, the mainstream media tend to be more neutral in their tone despite an individual reporter’s ideological preferences, because they want to appeal to both conservative and liberal viewers alike — because that’s where the greatest market is for making money. People only perceive the mainstream media as being biased because of their own biases.

“If a person is ideological, the more closely they’re going to zero in on things they disagree with,” Mr. D’Alessio said.

He conducted an experiment where he gave the same newspaper article to both Republicans and Democrats and told them to circle the bias. Republicans circled the liberal viewpoint in the story whereas the Democrats circled the conservative representation.

“But both sides were represented,” he said. “People need to take a step back and evaluate [that] just because I don’t agree with what someone says in the newspaper doesn’t mean the newspaper is lying about it.”

[*Nately120*]

Why don't Republicans want to be journalists?

[GodHatesBengals]

This matters just as little now as it did 25 years ago.

The media's systematic biases are much more complex than a simple headcount of who votes Democrat and who votes Republican. I don't know a single person who enjoys getting cold calls, yet there are tons of those same people working in call centers. Tell me: when they're on the job, does it matter what their personal feelings are?

The media in this country is overwhelmingly corporate owned. Thus, their primary motives are making profit, protecting investments, maintaining access, etc. Now, how they go about doing that is a fairly in-depth but totally graspable issue; I recommend reading up on The Propaganda Model.

[*bfine32*]

I thought it were common knowledge that the liberal drifts more towards the arts to include journalism; while the conservative follows the business path.

Just look at the very forum: what do you think the liberal to conservative ratio is?

[Benton]

(11-09-2015, 06:08 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Why don't Republicans want to be journalists?

one part low pay, one part having to be honest.

[*bfine32*]

(11-09-2015, 07:31 PM)Benton Wrote: one part low pay, one part having to be honest.

[Rotobeast]

(11-09-2015, 07:31 PM)Benton Wrote: one part low pay, one part having to be honest.

It could have had something to do with Hunter S. Thompson wanting to shoot them all.

[StLucieBengal]

This is why new media is more trusted.

They report on everything.... So you don't have the MSM deciding what should be reported and what shouldn't.

And yes that includes Fox.. They are part of the problem.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(11-09-2015, 03:48 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/8/republicans-media-bias-claims-boosted-by-scarcity-/

And we wonder why we can't get out the truth about our candidates.

Quote:They found 28 percent of journalists call themselves Democrats, while just 7 percent call themselves Republicans

How is your math?

[*bfine32*]

(11-09-2015, 08:13 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: How is your math?

Who knows? Maybe the other 65% are like most in this forum "You can't label me".

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(11-09-2015, 08:25 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Who knows? Maybe the other 65% are like most in this forum "You can't label me".

So what is their bias?

[*bfine32*]

(11-09-2015, 08:36 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: So what is their bias?

The sample size of 4 to 1 is enough to determine that and those that do not identify here definitely have a bias. I was just merely pointing out that his math might not be as as silly as you tried to make it appear.

[Benton]

(11-09-2015, 08:02 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: This is why new media is more trusted.    

They report on everything.... So you don't have the MSM deciding

first, not more trusted. They say what's more expected. That just mean they're trusted more. Like someone assertion in another thread that its common knowledge charities are better distributing money to the needy than federal programs. That's a commonly expected belief. And it's wrong.

for the second part, that's part of being a gatekeeper. And part of the problem with social media. Yes, sometimes they (msm) misses a story. But weigh that against all the propaganda from social media.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(11-09-2015, 08:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The sample size of 3 to 1 is enough to determine that and those that do not identify here definitely have a bias. I was just merely pointing out that his math might not be as as silly as you tried to make it appear.

I wasn't trying to make his math appear silly.  My question was to lead him to self discovery.  The majority of the media polled didn't self-identify with either party, but rather independent.  So I ask again, what is their bias?

[*Nately120*]

Do we need more right-wing journalists? I could be a right-wing journalist.

Obama is a communist, support our troops, all hail Reagan, there is a war on Christmas. Print it!

[*bfine32*]

(11-09-2015, 08:46 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I wasn't trying to make his math appear silly.  My question was to lead him to self discovery.  The majority of the media polled didn't self-identify with either party, but rather independent.  So I ask again, what is their bias?

Well we could use the population that did report to form a quantitative analysis, but that would just lead to a silly back and forth. We'll just leave it with me applauding you on your efforts to lead him toward self discovery, instead of trying to focus on the mathematical error. Very thoughtful of you.

[Rotobeast]

(11-09-2015, 08:46 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I wasn't trying to make his math appear silly.  My question was to lead him to self discovery.  The majority of the media polled didn't self-identify with either party, but rather independent.  So I ask again, what is their bias?

Biased against unemployment ?
I'm sure many of their employment opportunities involve people that despise one party or the other.

Whoops...... sorry if that was only posed to Lucie.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(11-09-2015, 08:53 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Well we could use the population that did report to form a quantitative analysis, but that would just lead to a silly back and forth. We'll just leave it with me applauding you on your efforts to lead him toward self discovery, instead of trying to focus on the mathematical error. Very thoughtful of you.

I didn't focus on any mathematical error because I'm unaware of any mathematical error.  Would you care to point out the error I focused upon?  Or would you care to continue avoiding answering the bias of the media who didn't self-identify with either party?