Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site talcott.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!gjk
From: gjk@talcott.UUCP (Greg Kuperberg)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: To tim sevener re media bias
Message-ID: <316@talcott.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 3-Mar-85 14:43:18 EST
Article-I.D.: talcott.316
Posted: Sun Mar  3 14:43:18 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 5-Mar-85 02:33:45 EST
References: <700@decwrl.UUCP> <498@whuxl.UUCP> <2329@randvax.UUCP>
Organization: Harvard
Lines: 22

> No, you haven't proved that there is a conservative bias in the press.
> Think about it for a minute.  Who determines what candidates will be
> endorsed by a paper?  The reporters?  Not hardly.  Even the editor?
> Not usually.  Who?  The publisher and/or owner!  Now, what sorts of
> people are they?  Well, they often tend to be rather well off financially.
> And what party do "The Rich" traditionally belong to?  Republican, yes?
> So what candidates are the publisher/owners going to have their papers
> endorse?  Do they care much about how their staff feels?  Not often.
> The fact is that an overwhelming percentage of the nation's reporters,
> those who actually cover the news, are liberals and/or Democrats.
...
> 					Lauri

This is not necessarily a good model for Republicans and/or conservatives.
For example, Harvard is very wealthy and very liberal, while Mississippi
is very poor and very conservative.  Certainly the liberal New York Times
overfloweth with cash.
---
			Greg Kuperberg
		     harvard!talcott!gjk

"2*x^5-10*x+5=0 is not solvable by radicals." -Evariste Galois.