Turkey fans BOO during pre-match minute's silence for the victims of Paris attacks an

[Unregistered]

I guess you can't read.

it is safe to say that the median journalist in America is to the left of the median American voter, and that this affects how the news is presented to the pubic..... you would think that if there’s demand for more conservative media, the free market would provide it.... why hasn’t the free market corrected this imbalance between the demand for conservative news and the supply? It’s because economic outcomes are driven by much more than supply and demand. Institutions, rules, and power matter just as much as what consumers demand.

http://fortune.com/2015/11/02/liberal-media/

oops. You're right. I meant the educated Americans

(btw, its 31%-31%)

[Unregistered]

Conservatives Are Right: The Media Is Very Liberal

http://fortune.com/2015/11/02/liberal-media/

Study after study has shown that the mainstream media leans left, and that, as economists Tim Groseclose and Jeff Milyo have written, “an almost overwhelming fraction of journalists are liberal.” The extent of this bias, of course, depends on what your definitions of liberal and conservative. And the media has other, arguably more important, biases: towards controversy and producing content that is profitable. But it is safe to say that the median journalist in America is to the left of the median American voter, and that this affects how the news is presented to the public.

Yes, we have seen the rise of Fox News, America’s most watched cable news network. And there has been a proliferation of small conservative websites. But most Americans still get their news from television, and the ratings of network news broadcasts—the same organizations that conservatives claim have been biased for decades—triple the ratings of even Fox’s most popular programs. This state of affairs is very distressing to conservatives, who, along with independents, increasingly distrust the news media.


When economist Daniel Sutter examined the question of how a liberal media can persist in a free market, his most convincing explanation was that journalists themselves, and the type of person who aspires to journalism, are almost uniformly of a liberal disposition. “People with the talent, temperament, and personality to be journalists might also be inclined toward liberal political causes,” he writes.

Maybe because liberals have better things to do than to listen to TV and Radio. I don't watch TV more than a few hours a month. I listen to NPR on occasion on the way home (but usually listening to music). Basically TV is a complete and utter waste of time....

Cujo

[Unregistered]

Maybe because liberals have better things to do than to listen to TV and Radio. I don't watch TV more than a few hours a month. I listen to NPR on occasion on the way home (but usually listening to music). Basically TV is a complete and utter waste of time....

Cujo

So therefore on the subject of television and radio content , we can consider you to have near total ignorance. Thanks for clearing that up.

[Unregistered]

Ponder this:

When I was in college I worked hard and went to class and make a great living today. I did not have wealthy parents.

My roommate partied and barely graduated. He makes a decent living, but is struggling.

Shouldn't I make more money then him given my choices?

So therefore on the subject of television and radio content , we can consider you to have near total ignorance. Thanks for clearing that up.

[Unregistered]

So if the subject is that you get your information from television and radio content, driven by their need to sell advertising, we can consider you to have near total ignorance. Thanks for clearing that up.

Fixed it for ya. yer welcome

[Unregistered]

Fixed it for ya. yer welcome

Nope. 100 % wrong.
Seeking out information from various sources is superior to not having experienced them. What information is believed and accepted is up to the individual.

[Unregistered]

representative of the population. Majority USA

you know i tend to actually LOOK at data and something caught my eye there. The Wall St. Journal was assigned an 85 on that scale? I look at the journal itself a couple times a month. The whole thing. so not relying on isolated articles. 85? when i see a number like that I've got to question how this all was arrived at and what nut job agenda the author had.

Really. 85. Note that a lot of others were around 60's...high fifties to high sixties.

Thats appropriate. When issues are probed we are basically a center LEFT country. But 85? Wall St J?

I smell a turd. What do you think?

This gets to the point about nutters doesn't it. They cant look at things like this and question, can they? No thinking via first principals. They don't know what it is. All bludgeoning and bravado and empty hands.

Nice to address conversation to non cons on board. Need to do it more I think

[Unregistered]

Nope. 100 % wrong.
Seeking out information from various sources is superior to not having experienced them. What information is believed and accepted is up to the individual.

There is NO information on tv that isn't old and easily accessible in more expanded, informational form. Its the 21st century. Even the tv news outlets have robust online presences that break each and every story there before they do on tv. More depth too.

Maybe you can access them through your AOL portal. Is THAT why you spend so much time on a text based discussion thread?

If you'd like to argue bring it....along with some examples of what i WOULDN't be getting if I didn't watch TV (and I'm not the OP so I DO but for the sheer entertainment value I assure you. Never heard anything i didn't already know if I had been online anytime if previous 4 h

"What information is believed and accepted is up to the individual.'

what a simpleton you sound like. what is informative at all about THAT statement....maybe some folks DO need to take in more TV information. Jeez.

[Unregistered]

So therefore on the subject of television and radio content , we can consider you to have near total ignorance. Thanks for clearing that up.

Uhhh. 5 hours of NPR in a week is all you need to understand things.

Cujo

[Unregistered]

you know i tend to actually LOOK at data and something caught my eye there. The Wall St. Journal was assigned an 85 on that scale? I look at the journal itself a couple times a month. The whole thing. so not relying on isolated articles. 85? when i see a number like that I've got to question how this all was arrived at and what nut job agenda the author had.

Really. 85. Note that a lot of others were around 60's...high fifties to high sixties.

Thats appropriate. When issues are probed we are basically a center LEFT country. But 85? Wall St J?

I smell a turd. What do you think?

This gets to the point about nutters doesn't it. They cant look at things like this and question, can they? No thinking via first principals. They don't know what it is. All bludgeoning and bravado and empty hands.

Nice to address conversation to non cons on board. Need to do it more I think

When a group of people believe that dinosaurs and man lived at the same time what do you expect when it comes to an assessment of liberal bias. The nutters are so far to the right that right of center looks left.

[Unregistered]

There is NO information on tv that isn't old and easily accessible in more expanded, informational form. Its the 21st century. Even the tv news outlets have robust online presences that break each and every story there before they do on tv. More depth too.

Maybe you can access them through your AOL portal. Is THAT why you spend so much time on a text based discussion thread?

If you'd like to argue bring it....along with some examples of what i WOULDN't be getting if I didn't watch TV (and I'm not the OP so I DO but for the sheer entertainment value I assure you. Never heard anything i didn't already know if I had been online anytime if previous 4 h

"What information is believed and accepted is up to the individual.'

what a simpleton you sound like. what is informative at all about THAT statement....maybe " some folks DO need to take in more TV information. Jeez.

No one said that information on Television may not be available elsewhere. The subject matter is that if you DO NOT watch TV, then you are IGNORANT of what is being shown. Very simple. Either you are watching TV or you are not .

" We are constantly presented with information . It is the individual's belief in specific information which then can become knowledge"

And as usual, the Lib has to add an insult or two.

[Unregistered]

Uhhh. 5 hours of NPR in a week is all you need to understand things.

Cujo

If you limit it to some of the great music they provide, perhaps.

[Unregistered]

When a group of people believe that dinosaurs and man lived at the same time what do you expect when it comes to an assessment of liberal bias. The nutters are so far to the right that right of center looks left.

" The unborn person doesn't have Constitutional rights "
Hillary Clinton

[Unregistered]

If you limit it to some of the great music they provide, perhaps.

Why? Because they don't view America as the center of the universe and that they are neutral observers and reporters?

Or is it because the Muslims they interview don't conform to your expectations and prejudices?

Cujo

[Unregistered]

I guess you can't read.

it is safe to say that the median journalist in America is to the left of the median American voter, and that this affects how the news is presented to the pubic..... you would think that if there’s demand for more conservative media, the free market would provide it.... why hasn’t the free market corrected this imbalance between the demand for conservative news and the supply? It’s because economic outcomes are driven by much more than supply and demand. Institutions, rules, and power matter just as much as what consumers demand.

http://fortune.com/2015/11/02/liberal-media/

I never read anything that disagrees with my world view. I am a liberal after all.