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