Is your News Source Left or Right

[*bfine32*]

Info is about a year old, but I found it quite interesting:

http://www.businessinsider.com/what-your-preferred-news-outlet-says-about-your-political-ideology-2014-10

Bad News: I cannot copy and paste the article, because it has too many imagines.

Good News: Most of you can just follow along by looking at the pictures.


If appears we should get our news from Yahoo if we want "fair and balanced".

[Belsnickel]

This actually isn't about what the political leanings of the new source itself are, it's about the political ideologies of the consumers. Saying a source leans one way or the other based on this information is an assumption that has no backing here. I think we had an article on here or on the other board discussing the different news sources and their perceived v. realistic biases and how they didn't often match up, however those perceived biases are what tends to drive these numbers. Not what they really are.

[GMDino]

(12-11-2015, 02:51 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Info is about a year old, but I found it quite interesting:

http://www.businessinsider.com/what-your-preferred-news-outlet-says-about-your-political-ideology-2014-10

Bad News: I cannot copy and paste the article, because it has too many imagines.

Good News: Most of you can just follow along by looking at the pictures.


If appears we should get our news from Yahoo if we want "fair and balanced".

Looks about right.

And interesting that the more liberal sites were closer to the average consumer than the more conservative sites.

But overall it seems fair.

[CageTheBengal]

How can people not have a problem with the news being left or right leaning? The news should be unbiased and unfiltered if all they are doing is reporting facts. Maybe there is something I'm missing?

No wonder everyone is so divided though there are multiple forms of the news that cater to your political beliefs and lifestyle and everyone believes their source is telling the truth. I think to get the most educated outlook you have to look at multiple sources and come up with your own opinion.

[*bfine32*]

(12-11-2015, 02:59 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: This actually isn't about what the news source is, it's about the political ideologies of the consumers. Saying a source leans one way or the other based on this information is an assumption that has no backing here. I think we had an article on here or on the other board discussing the different news sources and their perceived v. realistic biases and how they didn't often match up, however those perceived biases are what tends to drive these numbers. Not what they really are.

Are you saying a news source will not cater to the leanings of most of their subscribers?

[Belsnickel]

(12-11-2015, 04:08 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Are you saying a news source will not cater to the leanings of most of their subscribers?

No. I am merely stating what the article is saying.

[*bfine32*]

(12-11-2015, 04:28 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: No. I am merely stating what the article is saying.

No you didn't, you said the article "isn't about what the news source is". The article asserts the demographic of a news source's audience saying a lot about what the source is.

[Belsnickel]

(12-11-2015, 04:36 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No you didn't, you said the article "isn't about what the news source is". The article asserts the demographic of a news source's audience saying a lot about what the source is.

Very well, I have amended my statement to satisfy your semantic argument and more accurately describe what the article states. The article is not about the political leanings of the news sources, but the ideologies of the consumers. As that was my implied meaning I (incorrectly) assumed that would have been the inference.

Anything else? Because the misleading title aside, the article does not discuss the leanings of the news sources from what I saw.

[GMDino]

[Nebuchadnezzar]

(12-11-2015, 04:45 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Very well, I have amended my statement to satisfy your semantic argument and more accurately describe what the article states. The article is not about the political leanings of the news sources, but the ideologies of the consumers. As that was my implied meaning I (incorrectly) assumed that would have been the inference.

Anything else? Because the misleading title aside, the article does not discuss the leanings of the news sources from what I saw.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

In other words, why is a certain news agencies customer leaning one way or the other?
Could be that the news agency leaned to that side at the beginning?

[Belsnickel]

(12-11-2015, 05:37 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

In other words, why is a certain news agencies customer leaning one way or the other?
Could be that the news agency leaned to that side at the beginning?

Could be. There are any number of things that could be brought up. I wish we had that other article I mentioned in my first post, it would have been interesting to compare. But with nothing more than the ideological leanings of the consumers it's hard to really look into things like that.

[Goalpost]

(12-11-2015, 03:21 PM)ExtraRadiohead Wrote: I think to get the most educated outlook you have to look at multiple sources and come up with your own opinion.

My belief also. 

[StLucieBengal]

Furthest left I go on that list typically is drudge. Beyond that you start getting progressive media.

Still watch or read it but my spidey sense tingles when I do. Although it's odd but I enjoy Bloomberg.

On CNN it's hard to take anyone serious there except Anderson Cooper or Jake Tapper. Which I respect those two and their delivery of the news. I think they are fair. I think Megyn Kelly is fair as well.

[fredtoast]

Depends on how you define "leaning to the right" or "leaning to the left".

I know many people who think CNN ;leans to the left because it did not report that Obama was a muslim who was really born in Africa. Perfect example of this was Carly Fiorina on CNN the other day talking accusing the poepl at CNN of sayihng things they never did. All she was doing wa repeating comments from the right-wing echo chamber as if they were real. She kept talking about how CNN blamed Sarah Palin for Gabriella Gifford getting shot.

[GMDino]

(12-11-2015, 09:38 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Furthest left I go on that list typically is drudge.   Beyond that you start getting progressive media.  

Still watch or read it but my spidey sense tingles when I do.    Although it's odd but I enjoy Bloomberg.  

On CNN it's hard to take anyone serious there except Anderson Cooper or Jake Tapper.   Which I respect those two and their delivery of the news.  I think they are fair.  I think Megyn Kelly is fair as well.

So you were one of the ones who believed that DiCaprio was raped by a bear (twice!) in his new movie? 

[jfkbengals]

(12-11-2015, 03:21 PM)ExtraRadiohead Wrote: How can people not have a problem with the news being left or right leaning? The news should be unbiased and unfiltered if all they are doing is reporting facts. Maybe there is something I'm missing?

No wonder everyone is so divided though there are multiple forms of the news that cater to your political beliefs and lifestyle and everyone believes their source is telling the truth. I think to get the most educated outlook you have to look at multiple sources and come up with your own opinion.

They aren't reporting facts anymore.

That stopped in the 80's.

Now it is "anchors" (i.e. pundits and talking heads) taking some information, factual or not; making an interpretation or inference which coincides with the agenda of their side; and broadcasting that conclusion to their audience as hard, factual information.

Gone is the day of Walter Kronkite telling you exactly what the event is and leaving it up to the viewer to interpret the how or why.  What's left is the Nancy Graces of the media stating an event and immediately serving as judge, jury and executioner.  This is followed by praising all who agree and chastising all who oppose.

[StLucieBengal]

(12-13-2015, 01:25 PM)GMDino Wrote: So you were one of the ones who believed that DiCaprio was raped by a bear (twice!) in his new movie? 

I don't keep up with Hollywood news. I will leave that that stuff to you.

[GMDino]

(12-13-2015, 04:41 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I don't keep up with Hollywood news.   I will leave that that stuff to you.

Sure you do.  If you read Drudge.  Heck he even had a photo of the scene!

[Rotobeast]

(12-13-2015, 01:25 PM)GMDino Wrote: So you were one of the ones who believed that DiCaprio was raped by a bear (twice!) in his new movie? 

[StLucieBengal]

(12-13-2015, 06:32 PM)GMDino Wrote: Sure you do.  If you read Drudge.  Heck he even had a photo of the scene!

Ah so that means I am supposed to read every link from any news source I visit?

I care about celebs lives as much as I care about any Random Californian's life.