A key element of the culture war is the accusation that "Liberals" control the media. The imagery of "Liberal" media bias by some, is a pack of rabid "Liberal" reporters who will stop at nothing to promote their Liberal agenda. Its all part of a vast leftwing conspiracy, who's only goal is to destroy anything rightwing.
The phrase "Liberal Media bias" is more often than not use as a collective phrase, all media has this bias, always.
Consider early coverage of "Conservative" Bush's claims of weapons of mass destruction and other claims made by the Bush administration to justify the war with Iraq. Untruths so thinly veil a slight breeze would knock them down. Are these the actions of a pack of Liberals out to destroy Conservatives?
Was it the Liberal media that spoke, when Dixie Chick, Natalie Maines told people who attended a London concert "We're ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas.". The reaction of some of the media was immediate, entire chains refused to play the chicks music (1 ).
Even though she clarified and apologized this wasn't enough for some media outlets. Along with pulling their music they held anti Dixie Chick rallies where they bulldozed their CD's (2 ).
It could be argued that Natalie spoke out at a time of national crisis against the president, and this angered some people. Yet another president of another political leaning (Obama) was condemned on foreign soil by a public figure (Palin) during a time of crisis (3 ). No immediate word from the Chick bashers.
On December 25 2009 a terrorist attempted to down a commercial airliner. Rob Jesmer Executive Director of the National Republican Senatorial Committee said in a fund-raising letter that Obama "showed a remarkable lack of understanding of the threat America faced, but in the face of what nearly happened a couple days [ago], it is even more infuriating," (4).
Former vice president Dick Cheney said "We are at war and when President Obama pretends we aren't, it makes us less safe," and "Why doesn't he want to admit we're at war? It doesn't fit with the view of the world he brought with him to the Oval Office. It doesn't fit with what seems to be the goal of his presidency -- social transformation -- the restructuring of American society." (5 ).
this isn't the first time someone has tried and failed at downing a commercial Airliner post 9-11. Richard Reid attempted to ignite a bomb in his shoe. Another commonality is president Bush was also on vacation. But it seems just about no one challenge his leadership, instead they stood behind the president (6 ).
What's important to remember if we have the Liberal elite running the media, where are the protests against the dissenters? If they truly run everything then the protest should be quicker and on a grander scale. Some Journalist have made note of this disparity, but thats it, so far. I believe dissent shouldn't be stopped because of national crisis. Someone might have a better idea.
Examples of "Liberal" media?(7 )
Is a "Liberal" conspiracy behind the "Liberal media"? Hardly, it should be noted the people informing the people about the "Liberal media" bias, is the media. Also the media is much more likely to label an "Liberal" elected official a "Liberal", than they are a "Conservative" elected official a "Conservative" (8 ).
Also the "Conservative" Presidnt George Bush distributed prepackaged press reports to Media outlets across the country, and the media outlets used them without telling the public where they got these reports. In all 20 federal agencies sent out reports of this nature, and the G.A.O. (Government Accountability Office ) said these reports were "designed and executed" to be "to be indistinguishable from news stories produced by private sector television news organizations.". Bush spent 254 million on PR firms for his first term, close to double of what the former Clinton Administration spent (9 ).
The G.A.O. said that these reports should make it clear that these reports are from the government. Bush said about G.A.O. ruling "There is a Justice Department opinion that says these -- these pieces are within the law, so long as they're based upon facts, not advocacy. And I expect our agencies to adhere to that ruling, to that Justice Department opinion. This has been a longstanding practice of the federal government to use these types of videos. The Agricultural Department, as I understand it, has been using these videos for a long period of time. The Defense Department, other departments have been doing so. It's important that they be based on the guidelines set out by the Justice Department."(10 ).
Again, does the above prove conspiracy against Conservatives? Hardly! Also for this bias to have any effect at all people must believe.
How effective is the "Liberal media" in convincing anyone of anything. Not very, 39 percent of those polled believed the media reported stories accurately (11 ).
My opinion if the media does have a "Liberal" bias, it does attempt to correct it with conservative commentators I mentioned, in fact the media has a whole slew conservatives are in the pool of commentators.
Despite the image there are Conservatives in "Hollywood" a few are Lorne Michaels, LL Cool J, LL Cool J, Angie Harmon (12 ), in fact a large list of can be found on the indopedia site.
Also consider Sarah Palin though she will mention "Liberal media" at the drop of a hat, she also garners much attention from the same media. Has Geraldine Ferraro garnered as much? "She was the first female Vice Presidential candidate representing a major American political party." according to (13) Wikipedia. If the liberal media is always picking on them, why would Palin garner as much media as she has.
It could be suggested that this was negative press. Hardly! What sane and rational person would hunt out people to attack them? She seeks out the spotlight make no mistake about that, she is now a commentator on Fox news(14). Who would even consider such position, if she suffered horrific attacks . Also She came in second to Hillary Clinton as "most admired" woman (15 ). Also what of her best selling book going Rogue? None of this would be possible of she indeed was under attack from the "Liberal media". It more like self imposed pity party.
I can mention three people that could be used as an example "problem areas" for the media. They are OJ Simpson, Bill Clinton, and Saddam. OJ was accused of killing his wife, this tragedy is replayed across the country too many times in a year. Bill Clinton had a tryst with a Whitehouse intern, and many if not most believe he lied under oath again all this happens, too many times. The media coverage of both were obsessive, you could not escape it. Finally this brings us to Saddam, we went to war with Saddam, spent billions, unstabilized a region. Saddam, also had a trial, but, when you consider the media hoopla over OJ and Clinton the media response seems muted, they had people covering it but not as much as the former too.
The media tends to not challenge the status quo, cover Saddams trial as much as they should have, they upset the status quo. It also tends to focus on things that can be sensationalized.
A research showed that any bias the media has either right or left are influenced by what will sell the most. University of Chicago economist, Jesse M. Shapiro who co authored “What Drives Media Slant? Evidence From U.S. Daily Newspapers”with Matthew Gentzkow , said "The data suggest that newspapers are targeting their political slant to their customers demand and choosing the amount of slant that will maximize their sales." (16 ).