Public radio lib biased but factual (Madison Capital Times)

[raccoonradio]

This could go into the public radio category but it does focus on news and talk shows:

Public radio is often accused of being liberally biased. This article
(link below) in the Madison Capitol Times says that public radio broadcasters tend to be liberal and factual--because "we're journalists and academists", according to the author of a book on listener supported public radio. The article does say that listeners are from all across the spectrum (conservatives listen to public radio for classical music and Prairie Home Companion)

(It should be noted btw that prog talk radio in Madison was saved after the station owner of The Mic mentioned a format change to sports
well in advance of the proposed change, and this gave listeners
a chance to protest. Now, did Clear Channel give notice around October
that the format would change at WKOX/WXKS in Boston? Nope.)

Anyway:

http://www.madison.com/tct/news/stories/index.php?ntid=120136&ntpid=2

"Meanwhile, liberals tend to listen to the news programs, and they listen for longer. A conservative might tune into a news show briefly and say, "Oh, they're still at it!" When asked about the perception of a liberal bias in public radio, Mitchell said the notion has an element of truth.

(Mitchell adds that every effort is made to be fair in the news
presented. Whether liberals have a monopoly on truth or not is debatable...)

 

[Radio_Realist]

Mitchell adds that every effort is made to be fair in the news presented.

Right. They put Daniel Schorr on to give his "analysis" of the news, but never the analysis of someone with anything approaching a center or right perspective.

There's nothing wrong or immoral about presenting liberal opinions. But no news operation that mixes reporting and editorial analysis seamlessly can honestly saying that they are making every effort to be fair.

If a newspaper were to attempt to be fair in news presentation, they'd keep strictly factual reporting in the news section, and the editorials on the clearly labeled editorial pages. To do the same thing, a radio operation needs to clearly identify when they are presenting a news report, and when they are presenting an editorial commentary on the news.

But there's another aspect of NPR's left wing bias that gives lie to any claims of them attempting to be fair. It's not just a question of whether what is reported is true. It's also a question of how selective the managing editors are at deciding what stories to cover, and what stories to ignore.

How much reporting was there about Pelosi and Murtha being booed by our troops when the two of them visited Iraq? How many stories about positive accomplishments in Iraq are ignored, while every negative story is given full coverage?

In a court of law, witnesses are not only sworn to tell the truth. They are sworn to the the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. That means not only restricting testimony to statements which are not lies. It also means not concealing any facts. That's the "whole" truth. And it means not reporting speculation and opinion as if it were fact. That's where "nothing but the truth" comes in. Any news organization that claims to be fair must conform to those same standards that a courtroom witness is expected to be held to.

Granted, media outlets on the right are often just as guilty of bias, but at least conservative news/talk program hosts are honest enough to own up to the fact that they are expressing a specific point of view. The liberals not only pretend to be "fair", they don't even have the honesty to call themselves "liberal", instead hiding behind the weasel-word "progressive".

 

[Ultimajock]

...Wisconsin Public Radio dumped Harry Shearer, Dave Berkman and Duke Skorich, *all* because of their strong liberal "political content." Liberal bias my ass...

 

[Radio_Realist]

Wisconsin Public Radio dumped

Wow!!! One whole organization within the Public Radio system dropped a few shows, so that proves that the entire Public Radio system across the entire nation, from coast-to-coast and from Canada to Mexico, including all of the various state systems, independent Public Radio stations, college-affiliated stations, and both the National Public Radio and Public Radio International networks do not have a liberal bias.

Forget the commentaries on "All Things Considered", which should really be called "All Things that Won't Reveal and Success by the Current Administration Considered". Forget "Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me", which should be called "Let's Make Fun of Conservatives".

After all, the Public Radio system includes stations that only play classical music. Conservatives like Beethoven, so that balances out the liberal talk programming on the other Public Radio stations.

 

[evnlee]

...Wisconsin Public Radio dumped Harry Shearer, Dave Berkman and Duke Skorich, *all* because of their strong liberal "political content." Liberal bias my ass...

done to death.

It's useless to argue about 'liberal bias' with liberals, no matter how much they protest. The various public polls and common sense tells you 'of course there is a bias'.

NPR's ombudsman said it. Congressmen have weighed in on it. The case has been presented, and the jury ( public opinion ) ruled. Of course public radio (for the most part) is liberal.

The same guys who can scream about Fox News' biases will look at you with a straight face and tell you CNN is not biased. There is no reasoning with these people.

 

[AKLes]

After all, the Public Radio system includes stations that only play classical music. Conservatives like Beethoven, so that balances out the liberal talk programming on the other Public Radio stations.

Beethoven was considered extremely liberal in his day so you have just contributed to the belief that public radio has a liberal bias.

 

[Radio_Realist]

Beethoven was considered extremely liberal in his day

I hate to break it to you, but this isn't Beethoven's day. Beethoven's day was over a long, long time ago.

you have just contributed to the belief that public radio has a liberal bias.

No, I haven't. The liberal bias of public radio isn't a "belief". It is a fact. If one is convinced that God exists, that is a belief. If one is convinced that water turns to ice when it gets cold enough, that's not a belief, that's a fact.

The only way to argue that public radio (and by "public radio", I refer to NPR and PRI) are not liberal is to simply deny the facts. The fact is, it is almost impossible for any news medium to be biased and factual at the same time. The two are generally mutually exclusive. As I pointed out in my earlier post, NPR/PRI might tell the truth, but they do not tell the "whole truth", and they don't restrict their content to "nothing but the truth". When one presents information in a manner that gives the receiver of the information a false impression of reality, even if the none of the information presented is itself false, then that is still a less than factual presentation of information.

 

[Ultimajock]

Wisconsin Public Radio dumped

Wow!!! One whole organization within the Public Radio system dropped a few shows, so that proves that the entire Public Radio system across the entire nation, from coast-to-coast and from Canada to Mexico, including all of the various state systems, independent Public Radio stations, college-affiliated stations, and both the National Public Radio and Public Radio International networks do not have a liberal bias.

...the bullspit egghead panel was at UW-Madison, thus Wisconsin Public Radio was specifically what it was about. Your delusions about the remainder of the NPR system are for a different thread...

 

[evnlee]

Wisconsin Public Radio dumped

Wow!!! One whole organization within the Public Radio system dropped a few shows, so that proves that the entire Public Radio system across the entire nation, from coast-to-coast and from Canada to Mexico, including all of the various state systems, independent Public Radio stations, college-affiliated stations, and both the National Public Radio and Public Radio International networks do not have a liberal bias.

...the bullspit egghead panel was at UW-Madison, thus Wisconsin Public Radio was specifically what it was about. Your delusions about the remainder of the NPR system are for a different thread...

did you read the article?

here's the very first paragraph, where the 'professor' doesn't exclusively say 'Wisconsin Public Radio'

"Public radio broadcasters tend to be liberal, while listeners break down nearly evenly along political lines, with slightly more of them identifying as conservative, said Jack Mitchell, who spent 30 years in public radio before becoming a UW-Madison journalism professor."

Like I said before, there is no reasoning with these people.

 

[raydofan]

...Wisconsin Public Radio dumped Harry Shearer, Dave Berkman and Duke Skorich, *all* because of their strong liberal "political content." Liberal bias my ass...

done to death.

It's useless to argue about 'liberal bias' with liberals, no matter how much they protest. The various public polls and common sense tells you 'of course there is a bias'.

NPR's ombudsman said it. Congressmen have weighed in on it. The case has been presented, and the jury ( public opinion ) ruled. Of course public radio (for the most part) is liberal.

The same guys who can scream about Fox News' biases will look at you with a straight face and tell you CNN is not biased. There is no reasoning with these people.

Provide examples of programs that are biased on both CNN and NPR.

And which ombudsman are you talking about?

 

[evnlee]

...Wisconsin Public Radio dumped Harry Shearer, Dave Berkman and Duke Skorich, *all* because of their strong liberal "political content." Liberal bias my ass...

done to death.

It's useless to argue about 'liberal bias' with liberals, no matter how much they protest. The various public polls and common sense tells you 'of course there is a bias'.

NPR's ombudsman said it. Congressmen have weighed in on it. The case has been presented, and the jury ( public opinion ) ruled. Of course public radio (for the most part) is liberal.

The same guys who can scream about Fox News' biases will look at you with a straight face and tell you CNN is not biased. There is no reasoning with these people.

Provide examples of programs that are biased on both CNN and NPR.

And which ombudsman are you talking about?

With respect, Raydo fan, this is the 4th time I have been asked for 'proof' of that comment on this board.

Everytime it's provided, it's ignored. So I will no longer waste time posting the links.

CNN's record is just as well known as Fox News, and NPR's own paid ombudmans has weighed in against it.

Do a google search, and the answers are there.

 

[Radio_Realist]

Do a google search, and the answers are there.

Even better, tune in and listen to them. One has to wonder about those people who cannot trust their own ears, but who instead require a link to some expert.

Have they no minds of their own???

Listen to CNN, and you'll hear the bias first-hand. What could be easier?

 

[Al Johnson]

Human nature at work:

For music radio... My station plays good music. Your station plays _____.

For news and talk .... If it fits what I want to hear, it's objective. Otherwise it's biased.

The article says the study's author claims public radio is liberal because the academics and journalists produce it and academics and journalists are liberal (the author is both).

Commercial radio is conservative biased but factual, probably for similar reasons. The sales and promotion people and programmers (often ex-jocks) who produce commercial radio are conservative. Radio news people outside the networks for the most part do not have journalism backgrounds (here again, ex-jocks or would be sports broadcasters) and for the most part they are conservative.

Proof: I bounced around the biz for a long time. That's my experience. Anybody who also has bounced around the biz and has a different experience is welcome to say so. And I am sure this rule does have exceptions (so does the rule about liberals in public radio).

 

[Radio_Realist]

That's my experience.

My experience, based on what I hear on the radio, is that regardless of the political alignment of management types, those who actually go out and dig up stories and report them tend to be liberal. However, given the dearth of actual reporters working for radio stations, at least at radio stations I can pick up on my radio, any discussion of bias on local reporters would be moot. Whether the programmers, and sales & promotion people are liberal or conservative is moot when all the station does is flips a switch to turn on the syndication feed.

It has also been my experience that those who work on the input side of the transmitter don't have as clear a picture of what actually goes out over the air on all stations as those who spend their time receiving the output of the transmitters. Those of us who listen to radio tend to listen to more stations than any one individual works at.

 

[evnlee]

Human nature at work:

For music radio... My station plays good music. Your station plays _____.

For news and talk .... If it fits what I want to hear, it's objective. Otherwise it's biased.

true.

that's why BOTH sides are biased.

 

[doc9464]

Far from it, Radio_No so realist ...

one simple example is the use of Brian maloney to discuss progressive radio, not conservative radio without ONE counter to the progressive interest in Radio. He was allowed on the air to simply repeat his BS mantra of the "evils" of left-leaning radio....

Not liking NPR does not make your opinion (and thats all it is) correct.....your Belief as you state is all that is...and despite the RW watercarriers that repeat the talking point repeatedly wont change your belief to truth.

Beethoven was considered extremely liberal in his day

I hate to break it to you, but this isn't Beethoven's day. Beethoven's day was over a long, long time ago.

you have just contributed to the belief that public radio has a liberal bias.

No, I haven't. The liberal bias of public radio isn't a "belief". It is a fact. If one is convinced that God exists, that is a belief. If one is convinced that water turns to ice when it gets cold enough, that's not a belief, that's a fact.

The only way to argue that public radio (and by "public radio", I refer to NPR and PRI) are not liberal is to simply deny the facts. The fact is, it is almost impossible for any news medium to be biased and factual at the same time. The two are generally mutually exclusive. As I pointed out in my earlier post, NPR/PRI might tell the truth, but they do not tell the "whole truth", and they don't restrict their content to "nothing but the truth". When one presents information in a manner that gives the receiver of the information a false impression of reality, even if the none of the information presented is itself false, then that is still a less than factual presentation of information.

 

[evnlee]

Far from it, Radio_No so realist ...

one simple example is the use of Brian maloney to discuss progressive radio, not conservative radio without ONE counter to the progressive interest in Radio. He was allowed on the air to simply repeat his BS mantra of the "evils" of left-leaning radio....

Not liking NPR does not make your opinion (and thats all it is) correct.....your Belief as you state is all that is...and despite the RW watercarriers that repeat the talking point repeatedly wont change your belief to truth.

Beethoven was considered extremely liberal in his day

I hate to break it to you, but this isn't Beethoven's day. Beethoven's day was over a long, long time ago.

you have just contributed to the belief that public radio has a liberal bias.

No, I haven't. The liberal bias of public radio isn't a "belief". It is a fact. If one is convinced that God exists, that is a belief. If one is convinced that water turns to ice when it gets cold enough, that's not a belief, that's a fact.

The only way to argue that public radio (and by "public radio", I refer to NPR and PRI) are not liberal is to simply deny the facts. The fact is, it is almost impossible for any news medium to be biased and factual at the same time. The two are generally mutually exclusive. As I pointed out in my earlier post, NPR/PRI might tell the truth, but they do not tell the "whole truth", and they don't restrict their content to "nothing but the truth". When one presents information in a manner that gives the receiver of the information a false impression of reality, even if the none of the information presented is itself false, then that is still a less than factual presentation of information.

Okay, Doc. I'll bite.

Do YOU think Terry Gross from NPR is unbiased? Objective? Fair? How about CNN news?

and~

Do you think Fox News is biased? How about Rush Limbaugh?

 

[Radio_Realist]

one simple example is the use of Brian maloney

"One simple example" proves nothing. When one is discussing the overall content of entire networks, "one simple example" is meaningless.

Have you never tuned into these networks and listened to their content? Can you not simply believe your own ears?