Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site randvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!randvax!rohn From: rohn@randvax.UUCP (Laurinda Rohn) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: To tim sevener re media bias Message-ID: <2329@randvax.UUCP> Date: Thu, 28-Feb-85 11:41:21 EST Article-I.D.: randvax.2329 Posted: Thu Feb 28 11:41:21 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 4-Mar-85 08:09:34 EST References: <700@decwrl.UUCP> <498@whuxl.UUCP> Organization: Rand Corp., Santa Monica Lines: 22 > It is one thing to have an opinion that the press has a "liberal bias". > (I think it would be easier to prove a status quo / conservative bias). > It is another thing to prove it or present evidence of it. > I have presented very concrete evidence: the actual political endorsements of > the nation's newspapers. Those endorsements are *overwhelmingly* conservative! > Thus I would argue there is a *conservative* bias in the nation's press. 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 rohn@rand-unix.ARPA ..decvax!randvax!rohn