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.