NPR exec issues challenge: show me the bias!

[TwinTownBisonFan]

Here is my summation of the evidence presented thus far:

[youtube][/youtube]

See if you can spin that into the ground.

that doesn't show "liberal bias" it shows a bit of bad taste perhaps - but considering she was responding to Helms assertion that AIDS was "gay cancer" it's hardly a surprising sentiment...

next.

[SeattleGriz]

I can show you NPR bias what I can't show you is a concerted agenda to advance the cause of a political party... and THAT is the difference between NPR and some thing like Fox. While there is bias (because there always is... objectivity isn't really possible - it's more like a goal) there isn't a formulated agenda.

Journo-list!

Don't suppose anyone from NPR was on that board?

[TwinTownBisonFan]

I can show you NPR bias what I can't show you is a concerted agenda to advance the cause of a political party... and THAT is the difference between NPR and some thing like Fox. While there is bias (because there always is... objectivity isn't really possible - it's more like a goal) there isn't a formulated agenda.

Journo-list!

Don't suppose anyone from NPR was on that board?

?

[Baldy]

[youtube][/youtube]

See if you can spin that into the ground.

that doesn't show "liberal bias" it shows a bit of bad taste perhaps - but considering she was responding to Helms assertion that AIDS was "gay cancer" it's hardly a surprising sentiment...

next.

In chimes the Spindoktor, right on queue.

[biobengal]

However, I can still be smug knowing that regardless of bias reporting at NPR is more grounded in analysis in comparison to the screaming heads networks.

And do you have a study to support that statement?

Just throwin' out a little red meat.

After all, for all the puffery on both sides of this issue, there really isn't a decent study demonstrating bias in ANY of the major news networks. Sure, there are countless books on the issue, but most "evidence" comes in this form: some commentator said this, somebody was fired for saying this...... etc.

Sadly, the eyes will have to do... and thine eyes do deceive from time to time.

[CitadelGrad]

Just read the transcript of any Nina Totenberg broadcast.

Here is my summation of the evidence presented thus far:

$hit, you got ears, just listen.

That should be enough, unless you are one of those people who relies on others to tell them what to think.

[biobengal]

Here is my summation of the evidence presented thus far:

That should be enough, unless you are one of those people who relies on others to tell them what to think.

I think you've missed the point. Sure, in my kingdom of one I'm a well qualified jury and judge. However, this has broader implications than one persons biased opinion regarding bias. Wouldn't you agree?

[CitadelGrad]

That should be enough, unless you are one of those people who relies on others to tell them what to think.

I think you've missed the point. Sure, in my kingdom of one I'm a well qualified jury and judge. However, this has broader implications than one persons biased opinion regarding bias. Wouldn't you agree?

Agree with what? That you're biased. Well, if you say you are then you must be.

[SeattleGriz]

Journo-list!

Don't suppose anyone from NPR was on that board?

?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

JournoList (sometimes referred to as the J-List)[1] was a private Google Groups forum for discussing politics and the news media with 400 "left-leaning"[2] journalists, academics and others. Ezra Klein created the online forum in February 2007 while blogging at The American Prospect and shut it down in June 2010. He controlled the forum's membership and limited it to "several hundred left-leaning bloggers, political reporters, magazine writers, policy wonks and academics".[2] Posts within JournoList were intended only be made and read by its members.[3] Klein defended the forum structure saying that it ensures "that folks feel safe giving off-the-cuff analysis and instant reactions".[2]

[TwinTownBisonFan]

?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

JournoList (sometimes referred to as the J-List)[1] was a private Google Groups forum for discussing politics and the news media with 400 "left-leaning"[2] journalists, academics and others. Ezra Klein created the online forum in February 2007 while blogging at The American Prospect and shut it down in June 2010. He controlled the forum's membership and limited it to "several hundred left-leaning bloggers, political reporters, magazine writers, policy wonks and academics".[2] Posts within JournoList were intended only be made and read by its members.[3] Klein defended the forum structure saying that it ensures "that folks feel safe giving off-the-cuff analysis and instant reactions".[2]

the fact that someone might personally lean to the left - and want to communicate with their peers privately to that effect doesn't establish bias...

[SeattleGriz]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

the fact that someone might personally lean to the left - and want to communicate with their peers privately to that effect doesn't establish bias...

Not sure if you read the article, but there were threads about "burying" stories about Jeremiah Wright because they made Obama look bad. That is bias. We will never know the extent of the threads, but shutting the site down after it went mainstream screams of biased topics Ezra didn't want people to know about.

Edit: Because my kids were screaming and I forgot what the hell I was typing.

[JohnStOnge]

Just throwin' out a little red meat.

After all, for all the puffery on both sides of this issue, there really isn't a decent study demonstrating bias in ANY of the major news networks. Sure, there are countless books on the issue, but most "evidence" comes in this form: some commentator said this, somebody was fired for saying this...... etc.

Sadly, the eyes will have to do... and thine eyes do deceive from time to time.

I agree with that. Doing a study to demonstrate "bias" on the part of a media entity would be difficult. First of all, people would have to agree on some measurement of "bias."

Me, I listen to NPR and watch PBS and it's obvious to me that there's a "liberal" or "progressive' bias. But one pretty much has to rely on other people also watching and realizing it's the case.

And, yes, I see a "conservative" bias when I watch Fox News.

But that's about the only TV entity I can think of that I can say that about. I pretty much think I see a "liberal" or "progressive" bias with ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, and PBS.

[travelinman67]

I can show you NPR bias what I can't show you is a concerted agenda to advance the cause of a political party... and THAT is the difference between NPR and some thing like Fox. While there is bias (because there always is... objectivity isn't really possible - it's more like a goal) there isn't a formulated agenda.

...not "concerted"...

...Conspired:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/3 ... 39916.html