From: stevef@bug.UUCP (Steven R Fordyce)
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Media Bias
Date: 6 Oct 92 04:34:30 GMT
Reply-To: stevef@bug.UUCP (Steven R Fordyce)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Handmade Designs, Salem, OR.

I find it astonishing that some of you still doubt that there is a
liberal bias in the media.  Even members of the liberal media have
noticed the bias towards Clinton; Gary Trudeau and the "New Republic"
among others have commented on it.

Sometime soon after I started this debate in these groups, I lost
(until recently) my ability to post NEWS (because an upstream site was
down for repairs), but I did get to read some of what of people posted
(very frustrating).  When I (and I believe some of the others on my
side of the debate) talk about bias in the media, I'm not talking about
stuff labeled "analysis", "editorial" or "opinion", but what passes for
news and (less often by me) entertainment.  I'm not talking local,
regional, or small circulation outlets, or scientific journals or the
like, but the national mainstream media: the networks, "Wall Street
Journal", "New York Times", "Washington Post", "Time", "NewsWeek", "US
News & World Report", etc.  When I say there is a liberal bias in this
media, I mean it is biased to the left of the center in the U.S., not
that the media isn't biased to the right of "The Nation", etc., which
it clearly is.

Moreover, I'm not complaining that liberal opinions are expressed.  I
don't want to censor or silence anyone.  Although, it does bother me
that this bias shows up in what is called news, my goal is only to
make people aware of it.

People who claim there is no liberal bias keep trying to label the idea
that there is a conspiracy theory in order to discredit the idea and
those who believe it.  I don't believe there is any conspiricy and I
don't know of any reason to think that there is.  As I have explained
before, it is well known and perfectly natural that people attracted to
certain professions have more in common than just their attraction.  It
is well known and documented that the people in the media are mostly
liberal [1] (I have never seen that disputed anywhere but on the NET). 
Most observers don't dispute any of this.  What is disputed is whether
or not this bias makes its way into the news.  I don't think most of the
bias is intentional.  I think the press tries to write to the center of
the country.  But I think they are human, and they make mistakes, and
that when they do it is only natural (for them) that the error is more
often to bias the news to the left than it is to the right.

Some of the bias is intentional however, and some of the press has
admitted it.  "Time" for example has admitted that they are advocates
for gun control and for the environment (read for the agenda of
environmental groups).

The best evidence of liberal bias (and in fact, error) in the media is
the way the Reagan years have been and still are being reported.  It is
absolutely cliche that during the Reagan years the poor got poorer and
the rich got richer.  We've all heard it over and over.  It isn't true!
In the "National Review", August 31, 1992, there is a section called,
"The Real Reagan Record."[2]  Even I, who have been following this
subject for years, was shocked by the level of outright deceit.  Check
their figures out yourself; the figures they use are in the public
record.  It is absolutely clear and indisputable: the poor, most
unambiguously did not get poorer during the Reagan years.  They got
richer, and if you follow individuals instead quintiles, people who
were in the bottom 20% of income earners in 1979, increased their
income by a much larger percentage by 1989 than people in the top 20%
did over the same period. The Reagan years were in many ways a huge
success, and it is an enormous crime that the record has been so
distorted that we are running from his successful policies.

Another example: how many of you think we are still in a recession
(nationally)?  People on the NET have said we are, and that it is the
worst recession in 50 years.  Both are false.  There has been slow
growth for the last five quarters, and therefore no recession
(unemployment has been relatively high, but that is irrelevant to
whether or not we are in recession).  And the recession we came out of
is not even close to the worst in 50 years.  1982's was worse for
example.

[1] "And That's the Way It Isn't: a reference guide to media bias", by L.
B. Bozell III & B. H.  Baker, 1990.

[2] You can get copies of this for $2 per copy by sending to:

			National Review
			Reagan Reprint
			PO Box 96639
			Washington DC  20090-6639
-- 
orstcs!opac!bug!stevef          I am the NRA              Steven R. Fordyce
uunet!sequent!ether!stevef         . . .  	        Deer are for Dinner
Newsgroups: alt.politics,alt.activism.d