Skip to main content

More than four decades after the civil rights movement and the second wave of feminism delivered two new paradigms to the nation, my survey of the past 16 months of six Sunday television talk shows found them still to be dominated by men, whites and Republicans, particularly right-wing Republicans, with a geographical bias for the East and Midwest. This was true of the guests, reporters and pundits.

Moreover, the views of the left, while not wholly absent, are buried beneath a deluge of rightist, center-rightist and centrist narrative. Interviewers and roundtables are dominated by a handful of media outlets and anyone holding opinions more than a half a millimeter to the left of conventional Beltway wisdom is three times less likely to appear than someone on the far right. The folks at Politico appear multiple times but nobody from TPM. You hear from the Washington Examiner, but nothing from the Washington Independent.

None of this is news to anyone with a liberal bone in her body who has watched these shows. But the details prove just how skewed these programs remain in the 21st Century. I'll get those details in a moment.

In his eviscerating What Liberal Media? The Truth About Bias in the News, Eric Alterman debuted the acronym SCLM, the "so-called liberal media." Alterman's outstanding 2003 book was not merely a response to Bernard's Goldberg's claims that the media are under the control of liberal ideologues. It was pushback for decades of right-wing success at convincing Americans that newspapers and the electronic media favor liberals and unfairly depict conservatives and conservative ideas. Alterman's skillful research iced that conclusion.

He wasn't first to dig into the matter. Kathleen Hall Jamieson's research dating back to her 1983 book, The Interplay of Influence: Media and Their Publics in News, Advertising and Politics, has long provided a good foundation for understanding just how true the "so-called" part of SCLM is. The folks at Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting have been doing surveys and analyses of the media's unliberal bias for more than two decades. Eric Boehlert has done good work as well.

While all their analyses thoroughly illustrate the steady stream of propaganda the SCLM floods us with on a daily basis, they shy away from the conclusions that Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman wrote about in Manufacturing Consent in 1988. In a nutshell, the perspective of those two was that, whatever the views of individual reporters, many of whom do identify themselves as liberal or left of center, the institutional structure of a mass media directed toward profit maximization and its subordination to external power create an editorial bias that often, though not always, makes it a willing conduit for propaganda. The run-up to the Iraq war offers a perfect example.

Even Chomsky and Herman did not, however, go so far as D, Sinclair, who said the media concoct "homeopathic dilutions of facts in a solvent of virtually pure bullshit."

Precisely when the idea that the media are overwhelmingly liberal first started getting hammered into Americans' heads is hard to pinpoint. Rick Perlstein suggests the 1968 Democratic Convention as a good candidate. But more than a decade before that, white Southerners came to despise the out-of-town media, especially the television networks, for coverage of the death throes of Jim Crow.

In fact, that coverage was a good deal more modest than it would have been had the media really been liberal. But the bus boycotts, fire-hoses and nightsticks slamming civil rights protesters, cops and shrieking white supremacists blocking black students from entering schools and lethal attacks on voter-registration activists were, from the producers' point of view, tailor-made for television. By then, the medium was penetrating 90% of American homes. The coverage ultimately helped the civil rights legislation of 1964-65 clear Congress. Some might even argue that, combined with arm-twisting by LBJ, the coverage made passage inevitable. Afterward, as the Republican Party embraced the Old Confederacy with its "Southern Strategy," it explicitly targeted the media in not-so-different a way as did Alabama Gov. George Wallace with his sneers of "pointy-headed intellectuals." Whenever this bogus conventional wisdom about the media actually began, it has now become so ingrained that even 21% of Democrats believe the media are too liberal. Only 20% say they are too conservative. Hard to take that without a major head shake.

It's not just who appears in the media, obviously. It is also very much who doesn't appear, whose opinions aren't seen at all. That, in part, is a function of the idea that all stories have only two sides, and as long as two sides are presented there's balance. Never mind that those two sides on a particular day may well be from the perspective of the right and the center or center-right. The truth is that most stories – especially political, economic and cultural stories – have more than two sides. Because the media are so subordinated to external power, the bias covers  not only what gets talked about, but also what doesn't. Real socialized medicine? Carbon tax? The permanent war economy and the military-industrial-congressional complex? The economics of class? A serious discussion of racism or sexism, not to mention heterosexism? Not a chance.

The Sunday talk shows, of course, make up only a slice of what flows from the media, a once-a-week happening amid a steady daily current from these same media and others. But together, they draw about 11 million viewers each week.

For the 16-month January 2009-April 2010 survey, I chose six shows: ABC's This Week; CBS's Face the Nation; NBC's Meet the Press; Fox News Sunday; CNN's State of the Union; and CNN's Reliable Sources. I left out The Chris Matthews Show and Fareed Zakaria's GPS. I compiled lists of guests and reporters, counting the number of times each had appeared. I did not include the anchors. (You can see my lists by jumping below the fold.) I divided appearances into six categories: people now serving or who have previously served in the House or Senate, or as governors or mayors; reporters/editors/columnists and other commentators; political strategists and pollsters; members of the current administration; members of previous administrations; and other guests. In a world where media analysts run for public office and previously elected officials become media analysts, it wasn't always easy to choose the appropriate category. I did my best. I also compiled a list of media outlets represented by the reporters, editors and commentators.

The results:

Elected Politicians, Past and Present

There were 137 individuals appearing on the Sunday talk shows who are now or have been governors, mayors, Representatives or Senators. Combined, they made 557 appearances. Of these, 242, or 43.3% were by Democrats and 315, or 56.6% were by Republicans. Not exactly fair and balanced even before calculating the D/R ratio in Congress. Of particular note, one independent Senator, Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, made nine appearances, while the other independent, Bernie Sanders, made a single appearance.

The Top Eleven? Mitch McConnell, 25 appearances; John McCain (21), John Kyl (18), Lindsey Graham (18), Mike Huckabee (13), Charles Schumer (13),  Kent Conrad (12), Dick Durbin (12), Dianne Feinstein (12), Newt Gingrich (12), Orrin Hatch (12). So, seven Republicans accounted for 38% of the total appearances by Republicans; and four Democrats accounted for 20% of total appearances by Democrats.

Seven members of the Black Caucus, 10 members of the Progressive Caucus (five of whom are also members of the Black Caucus), and four members of the Blue Dog Caucus appeared. The West was vastly underrepresented.

The Media

All told, 245 individual reporters, editors, columnists and other pundits appeared on the six shows. Of these, 94 (38%) were women, 210 (86%) were white, 28 (11%) were African American, four were Latino (1.6%), and there was one Asian-American, one Indian-American, and one Bangladeshi-American, (0.4% each).

These 245 appeared a total of 863 times. Of these, 773 (87%) were white, 112 (11%) were African American, four were Latino (0.3%), and four were Asian or South Asian in ancestry (0.4%). While that African American figure may look fairly reasonable, Juan Williams, on Fox News Sunday, appeared 56 times, accounting for half of the total appearances by black reporters and pundits.

Women of all races made 339 appearances, 38%.

The Top Eleven? Juan Willams (56), Bill Kristol (56), Mara Liasson (51), George Will (44), Brit Hume (28), David Brooks (20), Paul Krugman (16), Cokie Roberts (16), Sam Donaldson (15), Peggy Noonan (14), and Stephen Hayes (10).

I did not sort the media representatives by where they fall on the political spectrum. There's no doubt that Bill Kristol of the Weekly Standard (56 appearances) is an ultra-conservative and David Corn of Mother Jones (two appearances) is an ultra-liberal. But in many cases, selecting was too highly subjective. The concentration of media they represent, however, is telling. Remember, this does not include the anchors:

From the Washington Post, 125 appearances; NPR (80); the Weekly Standard (70); The New York Times (63); CBS (48); ABC (42); The Wall Street Journal (25), CNBC (16), PBS (13), Time (12) NBC (12).

As regards left vs. right (excluding The Wall Street Journal), I stretched the terms a little and included the Huffington Post (10) and Slate (4) with the leftwing The Nation (7), Salon (4), Air America (5), Mother Jones (2), AmericaBlog (1) and The American Prospect (1). Total: 34.

On the right, CBN (2), National Review (8); Politico (14); the Weekly Standard (70); Washington Examiner (9) and the Washington Times (10). Total: 113, or 76% of the left-right grouping.

In the 863 appearances in this category, only two media outlets based west of the Mississippi were included in the line-ups of these six shows. Representatives from The Hollywood Reporter and the Kansas City Star made one appearance each.

The Partisans

Twenty-seven partisan strategists and pollsters appeared on the Sunday talk shows in the past 16 months. It seems that Mary Matalin, the Republican strategist, and her husband Jim Carville, the Democratic strategist, must car-pool given how often they appear across from each other on the same show. Quite the gig if you can get it. Together the Matalin-Carville duo accounted for 30 (21%) of the total of 145 appearances by these 27 folks. The split was even: 70 Republicans and 75 Democrats. Democrat Donna Brazile appeared the most, 28 times. Ed Gillespie, with 15 appearances, was the most seen Republican.

The Obama Administration

Thirty individuals from the Obama Administration made 184 appearances. Leading the pack? David Axelrod, 25 times, followed by Larry Summers, 16; Hillary Clinton 15; Kathleen Sebelius, 15; Robert Gibbs, 12; Robert Gates, 11; Christina Romer, 9; Jim Jones, 9. Most conspicuous by their complete absence at a time when jobs and energy were much discussed: Labor Secretary Hilda Solis and Energy Secretary Steven Chu. Gary Locke, Tom Vilsack and Eric Shinseki also made no appearances on the Sunday talk shows.

Previous Administrations

From previous administrations, 47 Republicans and 23 Democrats appeared. Dick Cheney (5), Dana Perino (7) and apostate David Frum (6) were the most frequently seen Republicans. With 10 appearances, former Labor Secretary Robert Reich led the Democrats.

Other Guests

And, finally, in the "other guests" category, there were 147 individuals. Of these, 15 were foreign nationals. Leaving them aside, 109 (82%) were white, 20 (14%) African American; two (1.5%)  Latino, and two (1.5%) were of Middle Eastern or Indian subcontinent ancestry. Again, while the percentage of African American guests seems in line with population, six of them were basketball players, two were entertainers, and six others appeared solely to address racial issues. Only 26 in this category were women, 20% of the total.

Again, leaving out the foreign nationals, there were 185 appearances by these 132 individuals. Of these: 153 (83%) were by whites (with one by a basketball player and two by entertainers); 25 (13.5%) were by African Americans (six by basketball players, three by entertainers, and 10 by guests appearing solely to address racial issues. Latinos appeared three times (1.6%), and those of Middle Eastern or Indian subcontinent ancestry appeared four times (2%). Of the total 185 appearances, only 27 (14.5%) were by women.

While Fox News contributes greatly to the skewing of the Sunday talk shows, it is not alone in failing when it comes to minorities, particularly Latinos, who make up at least 15% of the population, women, who are slightly more than half, the Democratic Party, and the left.

Nonetheless, a multitude of conservatives continues to embed the narrative. When they say "liberal media," they never include "so-called." Says Bill O'Reilly:

There's no question the media in America is heavily liberal. Every study shows that. With the rise of the Internet, the far left now dominates the liberal agenda....

As Alterman says, the idea the media might – because of who owns them, because of economic pressures, and because of outside political pressure –actually "be more sympathetic to conservative causes than liberal ones is widely considered to be simply beyond the pale." No matter what the evidence shows, the myth lives.

Current Administration

David Axelrod – 25; Jared Bernstein – 1; Dr. Richard Besser – 4; Joe Biden – 7; John Brennan,– 5; Hillary Clinton, – 15; Nancy DeParle – 1; Shaun Donovan, – 2; Linda Douglas – 1; Tammy Duckworth – 1; Arne Duncan – 2; Anita Dunn  – 2; Rahm Emanuel – 5; Robert Gates – 11; Tim Geithner – 7; Robert Gibbs – 12; Austin Goolsbee – 4; Richard Holbrooke – 1; Valerie Jarrett – 5; Jim Jones – 9; Ray LaHood – 1; Janet Napolitano – 5; Barack Obama – 2; Peter Orszag – 6; David Plouffe – 2; Susan Rice – 4; Christina Romer – 9; Kathleen Sebelius  – 15; Peter Souza – 4; Larry Summers – 16.

Previous Administrations

Bill Bennett (R) – 4; Erskine Bowles (D) – 1; Zbigniew Brzezinski (D) – 1; George W. Bush (R) – 4; George H.W. Bush (R) – 1; Dick Cheney (R) – 5; Michael Chertoff (R) – 2; Bill Clinton  (D) – 5; Ken Duberstein (R) – 1; David Frum (R) – 6; David Gergen (R – 1; Michael Gerson (R)– 1;
Karen Hughes (R) – 2; Joe Lockhart (D) – 1; Dee Dee Myers (D) – 5; Henry Paulson (R) – 1; Dana Perino (R) – 7; Robert Reich (D) – 10; Karl Rove (R) – 6; Dan Senor (R) – 2; Nicole Wallace (R) – 2; Juan Zarate (R) – 1; Tom Ridge (R) – 1

Partisan Strategists and Pollsters

Paul Begala (D) – 1, Donna Brazile (D) – 28, James Carville (D) – 17, Alex Castellanos, Alex (R) - 1, Liz Cheney (R)– 11, Torie Clark (R) – 1, Howard Dean (D) ex-DNC – 5, Tad Devine (D)  – 1, Matthew Dowd  (R)  – 13, Karen Finney (D)  – 1, Rich Galen (R)  - 1, Ed Gillespie (R)  – 15, Stan Greenberg (D)  - 1, Peter Hart (D) – 2, Celinda Hatch (R)  – 1, Tim Kaine (D) DNC chief – 7, Mary Matalin (R)  – 14, Terry McAuliffe (D)  – 1, Bill McInturff (R) – 2, Mike Murphy (R)  – 3, Neil Newhouse (R)  – 1, John Podesta (D) – 7, Ed Rollins (R) – 4, Steve Schmidt – 1, Bob Shrum (D)  – 3, Michael Steele (R) RNC chief – 8, Joe Trippi (D)  – 2

Current or Previous Governors, Reps., Senators, Mayors

Abercrombie, Neil (D) HI – 1
Adler, John (D) NJ – 1
Alexander, Lamar (R) TN – 8
Altmire, Jason (D) PA – 1
Armey, Dick (R) TX – 3
Bachmann, Michelle (R) MN – 2
Baird, Brian (D) WA – 1
Barasso, John (R) WY – 1
Barbour, Haley (R) AL – 8
Bayh, Evan (D) IN – 8
Bennett, Michael (D) CO – 1
Blackburn, Marsha (R) TN – 3
Bloomberg, Michael (I) NYC – 3
Boehner, John (R) OH – 11
Bond, Kit (R) MO – 4
Bonior, David (D) MI – 1
Booker, Cory (D) Newark Mayor – 1
Boxer, Barbara (D) CA – 2
Brown, Scott (R) MA – 1
Brown, Sherrod (D) OH – 3
Cantor, Eric (R) VA – 10
Cardin, Ben (D) MD – 1
Casey, Bob (D) PA – 2
Chambliss, Saxby (R) GA – 4
Coburn, Tom (R) OK – 4
Collins, Susan (R) ME – 4
Conrad, Kent (D) ND – 12
Cooper, Jim (D) TN – 1
Corker, Bob (R) TN – 4
Cornyn, John (R) TX – 9
Corzine, Jon (D) NJ – 2
Crist, Charlie (R) FL – 2
Daniels, Mitch (R) IN – 2
Daschle, Tom (D) SD – 5
Delay, Tom (R) TX – 1
DeMint, Jim (R) NC – 7
Dodd, Chris (D) CT – 6
Dole, Bob (R) KS – 1
Dorgan, Byron (D) ND – 1
Douglas, Jim (R) VT - 1
Durbin, Dick (D) IL – 12
Ellison, Keith (D) MN – 1  BC
Ensign, John (R) NV - 2
Feingold, Russ (D) WI – 3
Feinstein, Dianne (D) CA – 12
Ford, Harold (D) TN – 7
Frank, Barney (D) MA – 6
Gingrich, Newt (R) GA – 12
Graham, Lindsey (R) SC – 18
Granholm, Jennifer (D) MI – 9
Grassley, Charles (R) IA – 5
Gregg, Judd (R) NH – 6
Guiliani, Rudi (R) NYC – 4
Hagel, Chuck (R) NE – 1
Hamilton, Lee (D) IN – 1
Harman, Jane (D) CA – 1
Hatch, Orrin (R) UT – 12
Hoekstra, Peter (R) MI – 4
Holmes Norton, Eleanor (D) DC – 1 BC
Hoyer, Steny (D) MD – 3
Huckabee, Mike (R) AR – 13
Hutchison, Kay Bailey (R) TX – 3
Inhofe, James (R) OK – 1
Issa, Darrell (R) CA – 1
Jindal, Bobby (R) LA – 2
Johnson, Bernice Eddie (D) TX – 1 BC
Kasich, John (R) OH – 1
Kerry, John (D) MA – 6
King, Peter (R) NY – 2
Klobuchar, Amy (D) MN – 3
Kyl, Jon (R) AZ – 18
Landrieu, Mary (D) LA – 1
Larson, John (D) CT – 2
Leahy, Pat (D) – 9
Levin, Carl (D) MI - 7
Lieberman, Joe – (I) CT – 9
Lott, Trent (R) AL - 1
Lugar, Richard (R) IN – 2
Markey, Ed (D) MA – 1
McCain, John (R) AZ – 21
McCarthy, Kevin (R) CA – 1
McCaskill, Claire (D) MO – 7
McConnell, Mitch (R) KY – 25
McDonnell, Bob (R) VA – 3
McGovern, Jim (D) MA – 1
Menendez, Bob (D) (NJ) – 4
Menino, Thomas (D) Boston Mayor – 1
Mikulski, Barbara (D) MD – 1
Molinari, Susan (R) NY - 2
Murphy, Patrick (D) PA – 1
Murphy, Tim (R) PA  – 1
Nelson, Ben (D) NE – 6
Nunn, Sam (D) GA – 1
Obey, David (D) WI – 1
Owens, Bill (D) CO -1
Palin, Sarah (R) AS – 1
Paterson, David (D) NY – 2
Patrick, Deval (D) MA – 1
Pawlenty, Tim (R) MN – 6
Pelosi, Nancy (D) CA – 6
Pence, Mike (R) IN – 8
Portman, Rob (R) OH – 1
Price, Tom (R) GA – 1
Rangel, Charlie (D) NY – 4 BC
Reed, Jack (D) RI – 5
Rendell, Ed (D)  PA – 8
Rockefeller, Jay (D) WVa – 2
Romney, Mitt (R) MA  – 7
Rubio, Marco (R) FL – 1
Ryan, Paul (R) WI – 6
Sanders, Bernie (I) VT – 1
Sanford, Mark (R) – 3
Schock, Aaron (R) IL – 4
Schumer, Charles (D)  NY – 13
Schwartzenneger, Arnold (R) CA – 4
Schweitzer, Brian (D) MT – 1
Scozzafava, Dede (R) NY – 1
Sessions, Jeffrey (R) AL – 5
Sestak, Joe (D) PA – 1
Shaheen, Jeanne (D) OH – 2
Shelby, Richard (R) AL – 7
Simpson, Alan (R) WY - 1
Skelton, Ike (D) MO – 2
Snowe, Olympia (R) ME – 1
Specter, Arlen (D) PA – 9
Spratt, John (D) SC – 1
Stabenow, Debbie (D) MI – 4
Strickland, Ted (D) OH – 1
Thompson, Fred (R) TN – 1
Thune, John (R) SD – 3
Van Hollen, Chris (D) MD – 6
Warner, Mark (D) VA – 2
Wasserman-Schulze (D) FL – 6
Waters, Maxine (D) CA – 3 BC
Watts, JC (R) OK – 1
Webb, Jim (D) VA – 3
Wilson, Joe (R) SC – 1

Reporters, Editors, Columnists, Commentators

Aravosis, John (AmericaBlog.com) – 1
Argetsinger, Amy (WaPo) – 4
Ashburn, Laura (Ashburn Media) – 5
Ashton, Dr.  Jennifer – (CBS) – 1
Bacon, Perry (WaPo) – 1
Baker, Peter (NYT) – 2
Balz, Dan (WaPo) – 3  
Barnes, Fred (Weekly Standard) – 1
Bash, Dana (CNN) – 1
Behar, Joy (TV Host) – 1
Beinart, Peter (Daily Beast) – 1
Bianculla, David (NPR) – 1
Biskupic, Joan (USA Today) - 2  
Bissinger, Buzz (Vanity Fair) – 1
Blankley, Tony (Washington Times) – 1
Bloom, Lisa (CNN) – 3
Blumberg, Alex (NPR) – 1
Borger, Gloria (CNN) – 2  
Brennan, Christine (USA Today) – 5
Brinker, Nancy (CBS) – 1
Brody, David (CBN) – 3
Brokaw, Tom (NBC) – 5
Brooks, David (NYT) – 20
Brown, Tina (Daily Beast) – 2
Browning, Dominique (Home & Garden) – 1
Brownstein, Ron (Atlantic Media/National Journal) – 8
Burnett, Erin (CNBC) – 7
Calmes, Jackie (NYT) – 1
Cameron, Carl (Fox) – 1
Carlson, Margaret (Bloomberg/Time) – 5
Carlson, Tucker (DailyCaller.com) – 2
Carpenter, Amanda (Wash. Times) – 7
Chandrasekeran, Rajiv (WaPo) – 2
Chappell, Kevin (Ebony) – 1
Chatzky, Jean (Financial Editor) – 1
Chung, Connie (CBS, etc.) – 1
Cilizza, Chris (WaPo) – 4
Claman, Liz (Fox Biz) – 1
Cohen, Elizabeth (CNN) – 1
Coll, Steve (The New Yorker) – 1
Compton, Ann (ABC) – 1
Connelly, Chris (ESPN) – 1
Connolly, Ceci (WaPo) – 3
Continetti, Matthew – (Weekly Standard) – 1
Cooper, Anderson (CNN) – 1
Cordes, Nancy (CBS) – 3
Corn, David (Mother Jones) – 2
Cossack, Roger (ESPN) – 1
Cottle, Michelle (TNR) – 2
Couric, Katie (CBS) – 1
Cox, Ana Marie (Air America) – 5
Cramer, Jim (CNBC) – 1
Crawford, Craig (CQ) – 1
Crawford, Jan (CBS) – 6
Crossley, Callie (Comm) – 1
Davidson, Adam (NPR) – 1
Deggans, Eric (St. Petersburg Times) – 1
Diaz-Balart, Jose (Telemundo) – 1
Dickerson, John (Slate) – 3
Dimond, Diane (Ex-CNBC) – 1
Dionne, E.J. (WaPo) – 12
Donaldson, Sam (ABC) – 15
Doyel, Gregg (CBS) – 2
Easton, Nina (Fortune) – 9  
Ellis, Jim (Business Week) – 1
Faber, David (CNBC) – 1
Fager, Jeff (60 Minutes) – 1
Fletcher, Michael (WaPo) – 1
Forbes, Steve (Forbes) – 1
Fouhy, Beth (AP) – 1
Francis, Fred (ex-NBC) – 1
Freeland, Chrystia (Reuters) – 6
Frei, Matt (BBC) – 2
Friedman, Steve (CBS) – 2
Friedman, Tom (NYT) – 8
Frost, Sir David (Al Jazeera) – 1
Fund, John (WSJ) – 1
Garrett, Major (Fox) – 1
Gasparino, Charlie (CNBC) – 1
Geraghty, Jim (National Review) – 5
Gigot, Paul (WSJ) – 5
Glick, Alexis (ex-Fox Biz) – 1
Goff, Keli (TheLoop21) – 5
Goldberg, Jeffrey (Atlantic) – 2
Goodstein, Laurie (NYT) – 1
Gray, Jim (Westwood One) – 1
Guthrie, Marisa (Broadcasting & Cable) – 2
Halperin, Mark (Time) – 3  
Harris, John (Politico) – 1
Hartman, Rome (BBC) – 1
Harwood, John (CNBC/NYT) – 3
Hayes, Stephen (Weekly Standard) – 10
Henry, Ed (CNN) – 2  
Hewitt, Hugh (Radio) – 1
Higham, Scott (WaPo) – 1
Holmes, Amy (New Yorker) – 5
Horowitz, Sari (WaPo) – 1
Huffington, Arianna (HuffPo) – 8
Hume, Brit (Fox) – 28
Hunt, Al (Bloomberg) – 6
Ifill, Gwen (PBS) – 6
Ignatius, David (WaPo) – 1  
Ingraham, Laura – (Radio) – 2
Jacobs, Bradley (US Weekly) -1  
Karl, Jonathan (ABC) – 1  
Kay, Katty (BBC) – 6
Keller, Bill (NYT) – 1
Klein, Joe (Time) –  4
Kornblut, Anne (WaPo) 6
Kramer, Marcia (WCBS) – 1
Krauthammer, Charles (WaPo) – 8
Kristol, Bill (Weekly Standard) – 56
Kroft, Steve (60 Minutes) – 2
Krugman, Paul (NYT) – 16
Kuttner, Robert (American Prospect) – 1
Leitch, Will (NY Mag) – 3
Lemon, Don (CNN) -1
Levin, Harvey (TMZ.com) – 1
Liasson, Mara – (NPR) – 51
Liesman, Steve (CNBC) – 1  
Litwick, Dahlia (Slate) – 1
Lizza, Ryan (New Yorker) – 4
Logan, Lara (CBS) – 2
Lothian, Dan (CNN) – 1
Loven, Jennifer (AP) - 2
Lowry, Rich (Weekly Standard) – 3
Maddow, Rachel (MSNBC) – 4
Malkin, Michele (Pundit) – 1
Malloy, Joanna (NY Daily News) – 1
Marcus, Ruth (WaPo) – 3
Marin, Carol (Chicago Sun-Times) – 1
Martin, David (CBS) – 1
Martin, Jonathan (Politico) – 1
Martin, Michele (NPR) – 1
Mason, Julie (Washington Examiner) – 3
Mayer, Jane (New Yorker) – 3
McLean, Bethany (Vanity Fair) – 1
Meacham, Jon (Newsweek) – 3
Medved, Michael (Radio) – 3
Meserve, Jeanna (CNN) – 1
Miklaszewski, Jim (NBC) – 1
Milbank, Dana (WaPo) – 3  
Miller, Stephanie (Radio) – 3
Mitchell, Andrea (NBC) – 4  
Moran, Terry (ABC) – 1
Nantz, Jim (CBS-Sports) – 1
Noonan, Peggy (WSJ) – 14
Norris, Michele (NPR) – 5
Norville, Deborah (CBS) – 1
O'Brien, Soledad (CNN) – 1
Ogunnaike, Lola (Commentator) – 2
Oliphant, Tom (Ex-Boston Globe) – 1
Orman, Suze (CNBC) – 2
Orr, Bob (CBS) – 3
Page, Clarence (Chicago Tribune) – 2
Parker, Kathleen (WaPo) –  7  
Perlstein, Steven (WaPo) – 1
Pitney, Nico (HuffPo) – 2
Pitts, Byron (CBS) – 1
Poniewozik, James (Time) – 2
Powers, Kirsten (NY Post) – 2
Press, Bill (Radio Host) – 4
Priest, Dana (WaPo) – 1
Purdum, Todd (Vanity Fair) – 1
Quick, Becky (NPR) – 1
Quinn, Sally (WaPo) – 1
Raddatz, Martha (ABC) – 3
Rather, Dan (HDNET) – 1
Reid, Chip (CBS) – 6
Remnick, David (New Yorker) – 1
Rich, Frank (NYT) – 1
Richmond, Ray (Hollywood Reporter) – 1
Ricks, Tom (WaPo) – 1
Roberts, Cokie (ABC) – 16
Roberts, Robin (CBS) – 1
Roberts, Steve (Syndicated Columnist) – 1
Robinson, Eugene (WaPo) – 2  
Rooney, Emily (WBGH) – 2
Ross, Brian (ABC) – 1  
Ryan, April (Urban Radio Networks) – 1
Salam, Reihan (Atlantic, National Review) - 2
Sammon, Bill (Fox) – 5
Sanchez, Rick (CNN) – 1
Sanger, David (NYT) – 8
Saunders, Debra (SF Chronicle) – 2  
Savidge, Martin (PBS) – 1
Sawyer, Dianne (ABC) – 1
Scarborough, Joe – (MSNBC) – 5
Seib, Jerry (WSJ) – 2
Sesno, Frank (CNN) – 1  
Sharpe, Shannon (CBS-Sports) – 1
Shaw, Bernard (ex-CNN) – 1
Shepard, Alicia (NPR) -1
Shipman, Claire (ABC) – 2
Shister, Gail (TV Newswer – 1)
Simms, Phil (CBS-Sports) – 1
Simon, Roger (Politico) – 6
Sklar, Rachel (Daily Beast) – 1
Smiley, Tavis (PBS) – 5
Smith, Liz (Syndicated columnist) – 1
Smith, Terence (ex-CBS) – 2
Sorkin, Andrew Ross (NYT) – 1  
Stark, Betsy (ABC) – 1  
Starr, Barbara  (CNN) – 2
Stengel, Rick (Time) – 1  
Stirewalt, Chris (Washington Examiner) – 4
Stoddard, A.B. (The Hill) – 1
Strassel, Kim (WSJ) – 3
Sweet, Lynn (Chicago Sun Times) – 1
Synderman, Dr. Nancy – (CBS) – 1
Tanenhaus, Sam (NYT) – 1
Tapper, Jake (ABC) – 1
Thomas, Evan (Newsweek) – 1
Todd, Chuck (NBC)- 6  
Toobin, Jeffrey (CNN) – 1
Touré (Pop Culture commentator) – 1
Tucker, Cynthia (Atlanta Journal-Constitution) – 5
Tumulty, Karen (Time) – 2
Vanden Heuvel, Katrina (The Nation) – 6
Vanderhei, Jim (Politico) – 4
Velez-Mitchel, Jane (CNN Headline News) – 1
Wall, Tara (Washington Times) – 2
Walsh, Joan – (Salon) – 4
Walter, Amy (The Hotline) – 1
Walters, Barbara (ABC) – 2
Warren, Jim (Chicago Tribune) – 1
Waxman, Sharon (WrapNews.com) – 6
Whitlock, Jason (KC Star) – 1
Wilbon, Michael (WaPo) – 1
Will George (WaPo) – 44
Williams, Brian (NBC) – 1
Williams, Juan – (NPR) – 56
Williams, Pete (NBC) – 1
Wise, Mike (WaPo) – 1
Wolff, Michael (Newser.com) – 1
Wolffe, Richard (Renegade) – 3
Woodruff, Judy (PBS) – 1
Woodward, Bob (WaPo) – 10
Yellen, Jessica (CNN) – 1
York, Byron (Wash. Examiner) – 2
Zandi, Mark (Economy.com) – 6
Zeleny, Jeff (NYT) – 3
Zuckerman, Mort (US News) – 2
Zurawik, David (Baltimore Sun) – 7

Other Guests

Abdullah, Abdullah – (Afghan Presidential Candidate) – 2
Ahmadinejad, Mahmoud (Iran) – 1
Ahamed, Liaquat (Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke the World)  – 1  
Ailes, Roger (president of Fox)– 1
Aldrin, Buzz (astronaut) – 1
Allred, Gloria – (attorney1
Andersen, Kurt – (RESET: How This Crisis Can Restore Our Values and Renew America) – 1
Arenas,  Gilbert – (basketball player) – 1
Asif Ali Zardari (Pakistani President) -1
Auletta, Ken (Googled!) – 1
Bair, Sheila (FDIC chief) – 1
Ben-Veniste, Richard ) (9/11 Commission) – 1
Blair, Tony – 1
Breyer, Stephen – SCOTUS) – 1  
Brinkley, Douglas (Presidential historian - The Wilderness Warrior: Theodore Roosevelt and the Crusade for America) – 2
Brown, Michael (Mayor of Flint, MI) – 1  
Byrne, Patrick (Overstock.com) – 1
Caro, Robert – (LBJ biographer) – 1  
Casey, Gen. George (Army Chief of Staff) – 1  
Chaconas, Steve (National Bass Guide Service) – 1
Chambers, John (Cisco CEO) – 1
Cooper Ramo, Joshua (The Age of the Unthinkable) – 2
Copps, Michael (FCC) – 1
Cosby, Bill (Come on, People: On the Path from Victims to Victors) – 1
Crittenden, Danielle (The President's Secret IMs) -1
Cupp, S.E. (Losing Our Religion: The Liberal Media's Attack on Christianity) – 1
Day, Tom (Bugles for America) – 1
Dinwiddle, Michael (Mayor of Springhill, TN) – 1
Donohue, Tom (CEO – Chamber of Commerce) – 2
Dyson, Michael Eric (Can You Hear Me Now?: The Inspiration, Wisdom, and Insight of Michael Eric Dyson) – 3  
Earnhardt, Dale Jr. (racecar driver) – 1
Eikenberry, Lt. Gen. Karl – 2
Fauci, Dr. Anthony – (Dir.ector of the Nat'l Institute of Infectious Diseases) – 1
Feldstein, Mark (GWU Journalism Prof) – 3
Fenty, Adrien (DC Mayor) – 1
Feulner, Edwin (President of the Heritage Foundation) – 1
Fiorina, Carly (CEO –Hewlett-Packard, Senate candidate) – 2
Frieden, Thomas (Centers for Disease Control Chief) – 1
Gates, Bill & Melinda – 1  
Goodell, Roger  – (NFL Commissioner) 1  
Goodwin Kearns, Doris  (Presidential historian and author) – 5  
Gorbachev, Mikhail – 1
Graves, Denyce (Opera singer) – 2
Greenspan, Alan (former Fed Chairman) – 5
Grove, Steve  (YouTube News and Politics) – 1  
Haas, Richard (Council on Foreign Relations and Huckabee advisor) – 4
Hall, Jane – (American University professor, formerly of Fox) – 2
Harper, Steven (Canadian PM) – 1
Hawley-Bowland, Major Gen. Carla (Walter Reed Chief) – 3  
Hayden, Michael (ex-CIA) – 2  
Healy, Dr. Bernadine (NIH) – 1
Hemingway, Mariel (Actor) – 1  
Henderson, Fritz (GM CEO) – 1
Hersman, Deborah – (National Safety Transportation Board) – 1
Hill, Grant (basketball player) – 1
Hilton, Perez (famous for being famous) – 1  
Ignagni, Karen (AHIP Prez) – 1
Isaacson, Walter (President and CEO of Aspen Institute) – 1
Jackson, Rev. Jesse – 1
Johnson, Dr. Tim (ABC News Medical Director) – 1  
Johnson, Haynes (The Battle for America 2008: The Story of an Extraordinary Election) – 1
Johnson, Magic (basketball player) – 1
Josten, Bruce – (ExVP of Governmentt Affairs at Chambe of Commerce)  - 2
Karzai, Hamid (Afghan President) – 1
Keane, Jack – Gen. Ret. – 1
Keen, Ken (Military Deputy Commander of U.S. Southern Command) – 3
Keen, Thomas  (Bloomberg ) -1
Kelley Kitty (Gossip Biographer) – 1  
Kennedy, Kathleen Townsend – 1
Kennedy, RF Jr. – 1  
Kindler, Andy (Comedy Central) – 1
King Abdullah (of Jordan) – 1
Klein, Jess (singer) – 1  
Komen, Susan G.  (The Cure) -1
Krakauer, Jon (Where Men Win Glory: The Odyssey of Pat Tillman) - 1  
LaPierre, Wayne (NRA) – 1
Levinson, Barry (Director of Poliwood) – 1
Lewis, Bertha – ACORN CEO – 1
Lewis, Michael (The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine) – 1
Limbaugh, Rush – 1
Lucchino, Larry (Red Sox CEO) – 1
Maher, Bill – 1
Malek, Fred (Thayer Capital Partners, financial co-chair McCain campaign) – 1  
Mankiewicz, Ben (Turner Classic Movies) – 2
May, Cliff (Foundation for Defense of Democracy) – 1
McCaffrey, Barry – Gen. Ret. – 1
McCain, Meghan  – 1
Morial, Marc  (former mayor of New Orleans) – 1
Morrell, Geoff (Pentagon Press Secretary) -1
Mowaffak al-Rubale (Iraqi Nat'l Security Adviser.) – 1
Mulcahy, Anne (CEO, Xerox) – 1
Mullen, Mike (Joint Chiefs Chairman) – 9
Myers, Richard – Gen. Ret. – 1
Nash, Steve (basketball player) – 1
Netanyahu, Benjamin – 1
Norquist, Grover (President Tax Reform) – 1
O'Brien, Rev. Richard (Notre Dame Professor) – 1
Odierno, Ray Gen. – 4  
Odland, Steve (Office Depot CEO) -1
O'Hanlon, Michael – (Brookings) – 1
O'Keefe, James (ACORN Film stinger) – 1
Oren, Michael – (Ambassador of Israel to U.S.) – 1
Owens, Jim (CEO, Caterpillar) – 1
Paul, Chris (basketball player) – 1
Pavone, Rev. Frank (Priests for Life) – 1
Petraeus, David Gen. – 4  
Pickens, T. Boone – 1  
Pierce, Wendell (actor) – 1
Post, Jeff (Curator of Nat'l Gem and Mineral Collection, Smithsonian) – 1
Poussaint, Alvin (Come on, People: On the Path from Victims to Victors) – 2
Powell, Colin – 4
Queen Noor – 1  
Rodgers, Dr. Bill (Center for Race and Ethnicity Rutgers University) – 1
Rohack, J. James (AMA Chief) – 1
Romero, Anthony (Executive Director of the ACLU) – 1
Rother, John (Director of Legislation and Public Policy AARP) – 1
Roubini, Nouriel (NYU economist) – 1
Rouse, Terrie (CEO Visitor Services at Capitol Visitor Center) – 1
Russell, Bill (basketball player) – 1
Sadjadpour, Karim (Carnegie Endowment for Peace) -1
Blair, Jason (plagiarist)
Sarukhan, Arturo (Mexican ambassador to the U.S.) – 1
Schmidt, Eric (CEO, Google) – 4  
Shah, Rajiv – (Administrator of USAID) – 3
Shan Ruhn Khan (actor) – 1
Sharpton, Al – 3
Shoukry, Sameh (Egyptian ambassador to the U.S.) – 1
Shriver, Maria – 2
Simon, David (Journalist and Generation Kill writer – 1
Smerconish, Michael  (Instinct: The Man Who Stopped the Twentieth Hijacker)  1
Smith, Fred (FedEx CEO) – 2
Snyder, Tanya – (Breast Cancer NFL spokesperson) – 1
Stern, Andy – (SEIU chief) – 1
Stevens, George Jr. (The Kennedy Center Honors: A Celebration of the Performing Arts) – 1  
Stonesifer, Patty (Smithsonian Board of Regents) – 1
Tenenbaum, Inez  U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission – 1
Thompson, John III –  (GWU head b-ball coach) 1  
Towey, Jim (White House Office of Faith-based initiatives) – 1
Townsend, Frances (Homeland Security Advisor to United States President George W. Bush) – 1
Trumka, Richard (AFL-CIO chief) -1    
Tuffin, Mike – (Executive Vice President of AHIP) -1
Warren, Rick – 2
Welch, Jack (CEO, GE) – 2
Wright, Robin (Dreams and Shadows: The Future of the Middle East) – 1
Wuerl, Donald (Archbishop of DC) – 1
Wynn, Steve – (CEO, Wynn Resorts) – 1
Yago, Gideon (IFC Media Project) – 1
Zinni, Anthony, Gen. Ret. – 1

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:00 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  talking about what actually needs to be done, and (6+ / 0-)

    what can be done...
    IS SO F---ING DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUULLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!
    Let's have some fireworks, bullshit or not, cause it make for better visuals.
    Why do you think every shot on TV has all the pathetic busy BULLSHIT going on!  
    Zip! Pow! Bang!
    YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
    Keeps the dummies from actually thinking, doncha no!

    Never walk into a public restroom while breathing through your mouth.

    by quityurkidding on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:03:44 PM PDT

  •  The West is a vast wasteland as far as media (11+ / 0-)

    companies are concerned. ESPN hates it when West coast teams are in the playoffs because their ratings dip. I see neither of my Senators (Murray, Cantwell) made the talk show list. My Governor wasn't their either. On the plus side my batshit crazy Representative Dave "I'm a birther" Reichert didn't show up either.

    Wal*Mart isn't the root of all evil but you can buy the plastic, cadmium-tainted, Chinese knock-off of it there for $4.27

    by ontheleftcoast on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:06:09 PM PDT

  •  i read the Alterman book years ago (20+ / 0-)

    i appreciate this research but facts do not help us in this battle.  the people we are up against do not deal in facts.  they have heard the term "liberal media" countless times--the big lie repeated until it is accepted as truth by the gullible.

    we have to reverse the "liberal media" meme on the emotional level, not the factual level.

    the problem with the SCLM term is that it still reinforces the phrase "liberal media".

    We need a similarly short term that we can start spreading.  Who can come up with one?

    "Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D."
    --Tom Harkin

    by TrueBlueMajority on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:10:48 PM PDT

  •  Fucking love this: (16+ / 0-)

    the media concoct "homeopathic dilutions of facts in a solvent of virtually pure bullshit."

    Should be someone's sig line!

    When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

    by PhilJD on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:11:54 PM PDT

  •  Can't beat; gotta bypass them ... (6+ / 0-)

    That's the lesson I take. Sure -- we can knock the commodity media around a bit, encourage a little more choice in their offerings. But their only function is to sell us to advertisers. Withdrawal and alternatives (like here) become more and more influential.

    The problem is then aggregating niche alternatives ... should we ever solve that, we'll be getting somewhere.

  •  And you could write the damn script ahead of time (17+ / 0-)

    As A matter of fact, I could write the whole script for this televised circle jerk charade um, usurper of airtime that would be better filled with reruns of old Loony Tunes cartoons, for a mere $200,000/year, plus benefits.

    OK, $125,000.

    Seriously, I appreciate these detailed accounts of what the media serves up every week. Because I really can't watch this shit.

    "So, am I right or what?"

    by itzik shpitzik on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:12:46 PM PDT

  •  Who actually watches these shows? (10+ / 0-)

    I would love to see the breakdown of that.

    BTW, if you had to be stranded on a desert island with either David Gregory or Jake Tapper who would you choose?

  •  Thoughtful, scholarly approach highlighting the (14+ / 0-)

    real media bias. It's a pretty damning and case-closed presentation.

  •  Is it slowly changing? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jeff Y

    It seems that there are a few more voices breaking through than there were 10 years ago. The ability for people to communicate and share their ideas, even with strangers, makes it a bit more difficult for the wealthy and powerful to dominate the story telling completely. I think that those who are now in their twenties and thirties will force the next progressive era.

    Infidels in all ages have battled for the rights of man, and have at all times been the advocates of truth and justice... Robert Ingersol

    by BMarshall on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:18:16 PM PDT

  •  The "liberal dominated media" is an old (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jeff Y, Eric Nelson

    saw used by Limbaugh back in the 80's when he didn't take himself seriously and was content to lampoon the actions of some feminist, environmentalist, and other liberal leaning groups.  I think that the right picked up on it when so many of them decided he was the messenger for the right during the Clinton years.  

  •  Seems it started in '64... (12+ / 0-)

    If you want to look for a starting point on the "liberal media" fantasy, you might look to the 1964 Goldwater GOP convention, when Eisnehower no less referred to the general run of  "columnists and commentators" who wished the GOP harm and the Birch Society-friendly delegates on the floor were seen shaking fists at the network anchor booths.  This was the same convention at which NBCs John Channcellor was removed from the floor. And, oh gee, yes, it was within weeks of the passage of the '64 Civil Rights Act.  What a coincidence.

    •  In my memory the "liberal media" label is (15+ / 0-)

      intimately wrapped in the civil rights battle era. I was in the South then. I began hearing the term not long after not only national news but some of the local papers began taking a hard look at segregation and tilting toward desegregation.

      In Georgia the Atlanta Journal and Constitution (Don't remember if they were merged yet.) were evil incarnate "Damn liberal media" in lots of hard line segregationist Georgia. The national television news with names we now consider giants, Cronkite and such, were right out of the Kremlin as far as that crowd was concerned.

      It would not surprise me to find that the label then infected the entire political "right" as the Southern Strategy began embracing those Segs in the national GOP mainstream.

      The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

      by pelagicray on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:48:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I figured it had its roots (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jeff Y

      in 1954, when Edward R. Murrow took on Sen. Joseph McCarthy, and when he came to the defense of Milo Radulovich, who was in the process of being discharged from the Air Force because his father and sister were receiving "subversive" newspapers.  That last one resulted in a "visit" from some Air Force brass to Murrow's office at CBS.

      The only part of my country I'm ashamed of, is Sean Hannity.

      by dwayne on Sun May 09, 2010 at 07:16:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What O'Reilly should have said: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    opinionated, Jeff Y, dwayne

    There's no question the media reality in America is heavily liberal.

    I love Republicans--especially flame-broiled.

    by Dragon5616 on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:22:44 PM PDT

  •  If It's Sunday, (9+ / 0-)

    It's Punch The Liberal Hippies Day!

    "Load up on guns, bring your friends. It's fun to lose and to pretend" - Kurt Cobain

    by Jeff Y on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:26:55 PM PDT

  •  It both cracks me up and infuriates me when my (6+ / 0-)

    mother's loony, fox-watching church friends refer to the "liberal" media. As if watching the most biased, conservative, piece-of-crap network out there doesn't skew one's perspective? I guess to Fox watchers everthing else would be liberal, relatively speaking.

    •  Perception is reality. What else is there? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Rumarhazzit, Jeff Y

      When Faux is the only input you've got, that's your reality.

      -- We are just regular people informed on issues

      by mike101 on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:51:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Rumarhazzit, I had a Conservative friend (7+ / 0-)

      back in 2003 who literally and honestly asked me where he could FIND THE LIBERAL MEDIA everyone was talking about!!  He wanted to actually read or hear something for himself and he couldn't find it ANYWHERE!!!  Truly!  He wasn't kidding!  I told him then that there was no such thing because it was just another Republican lie, but he refused to believe me or his own failed research!

      Unbelievable.  But people will believe anything if you repeat it enough and no one exposes the truth fast enough.  That's the key.  Catch their lies quick or they become "facts."

      I guess President Obama meant it when he said he was just getting started!

      by Little Lulu on Sun May 09, 2010 at 04:22:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This Bias net Result = (4+ / 0-)

    Smaller audience overall & Less Market Share in relation to the competition.

    In the Day of Internet, they have failed to find the crowd, but followed their leadership's direction.  The Audience has left them because they espouse a narrow viewpoint that the main audience is tired of hearing, (so they leave).

    As an example of this audience that really wants to be informed, but is leaving the traditional outlets, I have Colbert Report & The Daily Show.

    ... the watchword of true patriotism: "Our country - when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right." - Carl Schurz; Oct. 17, 1899

    by NevDem on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:29:47 PM PDT

  •  11 million total viewers (6+ / 0-)

    I'll wager this is not 11 million individual viewers, but the same 3 million watching each program.  Once I realized this, I stopped worrying about it so much. I don't even bother watching now.  It's much more fun to read Jason Linkins at HuffPO. where you get gems like...

    All right! Bring on the bedwetters, Joe Lieberman and Peter King!

    Wallace asks Leebs about the Brennan interview, and praises the law enforcement effort. "But we were lucky, we did not prevent the attack." Yes, because we don't have psychics, laying in milk baths, working with Tom Cruise! King says there's not enough evidence to convict the Obama administration of sucking, but he's looking for it! He's upset about "information" that "he'd never heard of" that helped Shahzad? No idea what he's talking about! Besides, I though it was Pete Hoekstra that leaks sensitive information, always?

    There's like, three minutes of un-livebloggable utterances that make no sense at all. "Miranda is more like a warning that it is a right," King says. It's actually just a reminder that arrestees have certain rights, the reminding of which has never ever impeded a terrorist investigation. King says it's important to find out about additional plots, which is information not impeded by Miranda.

    Meanwhile, Lieberman and his "Ha, Ha, We Can Now Arbitrarily Declare You To Be A Non-Citizen, Anytime We Want, Because While The Law Enforcement Process Was Working Just Fine, I Have To Do Something To Demonstrate How Super-Duper Angry I Am (Sound Of Tiny Feet Stamping) About The Terrorism Act of 2010." Read David Frum on this matter,

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

    "If we can't be free at least we can be cheap." Zappa

    by Zwoof on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:31:03 PM PDT

  •  It's ugly, (7+ / 0-)

    but I will offer an explanation for the persistence of the term "liberal media" on the right. It's race.
    It goes back to the civil rights movement and the "southern strategy". There is a substantial portion of conservative Americans for whom the term "liberal" simply means "ni**er-lover". It really is that simple. When the corporate media began using black actors in commercials, for purely commercial purposes mind you, these bigots plain folks were, and remain, convinced that the MSM are "liberal". The actual political bias in reporting and commentary has nothing to do with it.

    •  Sorry I'm Not Buying That. A Number of Trends (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      thethinveil, Azazello

      were happening coincidentally at the same time as black integration got underway.

      The radical rightwing had no entry into mainstream media. That's why they had to resort to organizing via direct mail, and to turning fundamentalism from being apolitical to activist conservative. From the perspective of all of the rightwing the media were and remain today (Fox aside) liberal.

      I must agree of course that the reality of the media has nothing to do with it.

      The right however has been calling the media liberal going back past the beginning of the Cold War.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:46:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No need to apologize. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Mnemosyne, opinionated

        I know that this is true for a large part of our population. I speak from personal, albeit anecdotal, experience and I stand by it. Do you think that the visceral hatred shown by many on the right for our current President is due to liberal policies ? Obama's "socialism" is simply coded racism.

      •  Vietnam may also have has something to do with it (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dougymi, pelagicray, dwayne, Azazello

        While "MSM" coverage of the Civil Rights movement may have moved many of those on the Right further along with their obsessions about "biased media", coverage of the Vietnam War probably nudged the starboard-leaning into full-fledged paranoia: the effects of which are still echoing.

        I remember when Walter Cronkite died last year, among all the eulogies and encomiums, there were still a few old cranks who just had to trot out the old "Walter Cronkite lost the War" meme one more time; over his on-screen "editorializing" during the Tet Offensive. Sadly ahistorical as it might be, there are still those out there who blame "media bias" and "slanted coverage" for US failures in Vietnam: usually carping BS boiling down to "over-publicizing the hippies" (those same "hippies" whose mainly imaginary influence is still being fulminated over today by the Right).

        Of course to the historically literate, or reality-conscious, more bloodthirsty rah-rah "kill the commies" jingo from the nation's media would have made no more difference to the outcome of Vietnam than its 2003 equivalent did in Iraq - but then, appreciation of reality has never been right-wingers' long suit, ever; whether gotten from the media or not.

      •  At least in the post WW II South the "radical (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Azazello

        rightwing" racist policy was the mainstream. They had all the megaphones, right in the governor's mansions and capitol buildings. I was there as noted above and the "liberal media" was to my memory first thrown when not only national media but some regional flagship newspapers began taking on the issue of civil rights in a way the political establishment and many citizens did not like and feared because that gave voice to others long quiet about an issue that had been a running, infected sore in society.

        Remember too, this was the "Solid South" for Democrats too. It was Democrats throwing "liberal media" from the snuff dipping oldster by the pot bellied stove down at the crossroad to the top state officials. Republicans were the god damned liberals! Often the "Jew liberals" or "rich liberals" and a triple whammy could be thrown with "those god damned Republican liberal media owners" because all were conflated in those minds. Believe me, for a white to even mention voting for a Republican could get all the terms thrown in! I'll never forget some of those good ole boys (probably about 80!) going nuts when I was overheard to mention such evil.

        Well, the ole Dixiecrats got absorbed into the bright shiny new Republican Party, or should we say Repudiate Lincoln Party, with the Southern strategy. At least for that contingent of the "right" I am fairly sure from personal experience "liberal media" started with the ferment for ending Jim Crow, supported by some major media, as masses of Negro troops, and some whites, began coming home and deciding they'd fought overseas for something they did not see at home.

        That is a story lost to far too many today. It is too damn bad our libraries are purging hard copy files and even the microfilm of LIFE, TIME and NEWSWEEK from those years because there are fascinating letters to the editor on that subject--from both sides. You won't stumble on those letters in a Google search that give you an exact hit. Dumbing down and down and down.

        The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

        by pelagicray on Sun May 09, 2010 at 07:57:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  "I'm Starting a Liberal Outlet. Please Name Big (6+ / 0-)

    liberal sponsors that make the major media so liberal so I can solicit them."

    That's my line. I never get it answered.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:41:33 PM PDT

  •  Great job (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    arlene, dwayne, Eric Nelson

    Some nice sleuthing, MB. I remember first hearing about the so-called "liberal media" in the 80's as a reference to a perceived lack of traditional values on sitcoms and other TV dramas. In particular, Murphy Brown, was often used as an example of the "liberal media." It was an easy sell to Christian conservatives and the label stuck. Somewhere along the line it morphed into a belief that the news media held a liberal bias, which even a casual observer can see is not the case. If anything it holds a bias toward the sensational, profits and ratings.

    Media Matters also did a nice special report a few years back, along with Editor and Publisher, on the advantage conservatives have among syndicated columnists in nearly every daily paper in the country. That's worth a look too.

  •  Bottomline...problem is the audience, US public. (6+ / 0-)

    Has the mainstream media ever NOT been owned and operated by people with agendas and financed by mostly business interests...from Pulitzer to Hearst to Luce to Murdoch.

    A more interesting study would be whether this is really anything new.

    Is Hearst's lobbying for Spanish-American war any different than Murdoch's lobbying for Iraq war? Both backed by powerful interests in and out of government who wanted the war?

    Media showed Carter's "malaise" speech in full. American public rejected the harsh truths in Carter's speech for the fantasy of Reagan's lies. You listen to Carter's speech today and it makes your hair stand on end how right he was about US and the future.

    But it was the US public who heard Carter's speech and rejected the truth and set the US off on the destructive path of Reaganomics, debt, decline and oil wars.

    Can we really keep blaming the media?  Especially when millions find enough of the facts in the media overall from NPR to NYTimes to Post.  Millions look at the same news and are able to suss out the facts on issues like Iraq.  Millions more look at the same news and buy into fantasies of Reagnomics.

    Granted it would help if media did act with more journalistic professionalism and actually asked hard questions from "Mr. Reagan your tax cuts are creating massive deficits and debt, everything you said has turned out to be wrong. How do you plan to fix it" to "Mr. Obama, you campaigned on public option, no mandates and lower costs and you just signed a bill with no public option, mandates and higher costs, everything you promised you failed to deliver. Why should voters trust you again?'"

    That kind of journalism would be nice but I don't know that we EVER had it.

    •  We Had VASTLY Better. There Is Footage You Can (5+ / 0-)

      see from time to time of a lengthy JFK press conference nearly an hour's length; also the nonpolitical but sheer reporting quality in the History Channel 1-2 hour special of the day JFK was shot, consisting of little commentary and mostly sequences of broadcast stories from national & local reporters on the day.

      At the JFK presser every reporter was at least up to the verbal ability and level of informedness of Obama.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:51:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Shorter press conferences are not media's doing. (0+ / 0-)

        You are blaming media for politicians choices to shorten press conferences.

        Obama's meeting with GOP representatives was great political theater covered by the media.

        I don't think you can really blame media for the bad choices of the American public.

    •  People talk about sacrifice (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      zett, dwayne

      but they always refer to other people having to make sacrifices; they are not willing to do that themselves.  What Jimmy Carter said was noble, reasonable, and made logic sense, but most people don't want to make those kind of sacrifices themselves, even if it would improve their own lives and the lives of their community down the line.

      I remember one of the earliest Simpsons episodes where  Bart Simpson is bullied by Nelson Muntz and gets sick of being pushed around. He then calls a meeting at his treehouse with all of the other kids who are getting bullied by Nelson and tries to come up with a plan to get back at Nelson.  Bart tells them "I can't promise you fun or good times," and all of the other kids start dashing out of the treehouse. Bart runs to the door and then says, "Okay, I promise you fun and good times!" and the kids all come back cheerful and happy. Unfortunately, the masses of people are like those other kids who only want to hear what they want to believe and not what needs to be heard.

  •  I've Only Lived 4 Yrs in Regions of the Country (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Meteor Blades, dwayne, thethinveil

    that had a single progressive talk radio station. Blue n.e. Ohio for example doesn't have it.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Sun May 09, 2010 at 03:48:31 PM PDT

  •  The funniest thing I ever heard was my uncle (5+ / 0-)

    trying to convince me that fox was balanced because they had hannity and colmes.

    "The truth shall set you free, but first it'll piss you off." -Gloria Steinem

    by Cleopatra on Sun May 09, 2010 at 04:04:51 PM PDT

  •  There is twenty to thirty percent of the (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greeseyparrot

    population that wants to be, needs to be led by the nose.  Since they are not people who actually do anything, the propaganda is largely ineffectual.  A problem arises when liberals/doers move to accomplish what these people are always nattering about.  Liberals do it in the interest of being supportive and broadminded and generous.  But, when considered objectively, most of what conservatives and their acolytes are after should not be accomplished. Sometimes, even just a little of what they want is a bad thing.  And, very likely, they don't even know it because they're operating from preconceived notions that have no basis in fact.

    What's the difference between a predator and a protector? The predator will eat you sooner, rather than later.

    by hannah on Sun May 09, 2010 at 04:10:58 PM PDT

  •  I can't believe you had the patience (6+ / 0-)

    to watch all of that drivel. You win the "persistence in the face of continued mental abuse" award.

    I had to stop watching some years ago. Instead, I go out for a nice quiet breakfast on Sunday and then relax at my favorite coffeehouse with light conversation and reading here in Little Beirut (what Bush called us in PDX). I find it better for starting the week in a peaceful frame of mind.

    Great diary!

    Yes we did, yes we will. President Obama

    by marketgeek on Sun May 09, 2010 at 04:11:18 PM PDT

  •  The market... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jds1978, Eric Nelson

    ...establishes just how liberal or conservative the media are, in the aggregate.  Right now, the MSM market is plugging along just fine as a center- to far-right message machine.  They have no economic reason to change.  None.

    What is needed is competition from liberal sources, and the competition has to be of the same medium type (e.g., broadcast TV news or cable news) as established players whose liberal/conservative leanings have to be altered.  As of now, blogs will not compete with broadcast TV media or cable media; there simply is no comparing the two.  Blog readership does not measurably alter viewership.

    Instead, liberals have to create their own broadcast and cable news services, and those services have to be successful enough to cut into the profits of the existing players' services.  As of now, the only model anyone is working from is Air America, which proved disastrously uncompetitive with respect to conservative broadcasts in the same medium (broadcast radio).  Given this failure, it is difficult to imagine why established broadcast TV or cable news services would ever alter their programming to reflect more liberal views.

    Yes, yes, I know Olbermann and others have been successful on MSNBC.  But the only true lever to change existing biases must come from outside the existing media players, and must be percieved as a very real economic threat.  To date, neither is the case.

    I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.

    by TheOrchid on Sun May 09, 2010 at 04:12:00 PM PDT

    •  Don't forget RADIO a huge dearth in progressive (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dwayne

      radio.
      All day pumping out rightwing propaganda on a street level language that broadcast televsion doesn't or can't  cover

      "you Are the Un-Americans, and You Ought to be Ashamed of Yourselves":Paul Robeson Appears Before HUAC

      by Eric Nelson on Sun May 09, 2010 at 06:10:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  AM Radio (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Eric Nelson

        is what I always throw back in the face of anyone who claims the media is slanted left. I always demand someone show me the left wing equivalent of the talk radio industry. I never get a satisfactory response, usually just some sputtering.

        The only part of my country I'm ashamed of, is Sean Hannity.

        by dwayne on Sun May 09, 2010 at 07:45:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Our nation's bourgeois reactionaries ensured this (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greeseyparrot

    Think of how we were founded: through a bourgeois revolution against the monarchy.  When the bourgeois revolutions were assumed (by Marx and Engels and others) to presage an eventual uprising of the working class, in turn, against the bourgeois, the reaction was the most fierce in America.  So, we successfully ended monarchical rule in America; and when popular, working-class revolution was mooted, we destroyed that too.

    So what does that leave?  Well, when there was a monarchy, the tension used to be between an autocratic monarch, and the nobility, right?  No monarch could ever rule alone, without support, but on the other hand, if the nobility became too strong, then the monarch would be weak and in danger.  

    So, having got rid of the monarch, and having reacted viciously to ensure no popular revolution ever occurred, we now have a nobility.  The mass media is part of that nobility.  They ensure the promulgation of corporate-friendly ideas, and the election of their own brahmin-heavy, or at least bourgeois, kin to office.  We have a nobility.

    "Arguments are to be avoided. They are always vulgar, and are often convincing." -- Oscar Wilde

    by Villagejonesy on Sun May 09, 2010 at 04:14:06 PM PDT

    •  Or (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Villagejonesy

      Marx might argue that the bourgeois period of development had not yet reached a) a crisis point, and b) a proper historical maturity to create a successful workers revolution. Feudalism lasted centuries after all.

      Or, crankyinNYC might argue that the violence and thuggery associated with those who claimed to embrace Marx during the 20th Century kind of killed the possibility of a worker's revolution.

      •  Agree on the second paragraph (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        zett, crankyinNYC, pelagicray

        One is always accused of being a reactionary when pointing out failings of Marx or Marxism, but nonetheless, there were certain things that just didn't work.

        In addition to the police states created by the communists in the 20th century, there were simply economic principles deriving from Marxism that just couldn't work, in practice.  Two of these principles are the idea that 1) you can somehow get rid of "profiteering" without getting rid of money.  This ignores the fact that if you have money, you have hundreds of millions of transactions daily, each based by definition on the prospect of each side getting more money or spending less money.  2) The idea that the state can allocate the distribution of raw materials and finished goods is likewise a control-freak fantasy.  This is too complicated for the state to monitor.

        As to your first paragraph, Richard F. Hamilton's book "Marxism, Leninism and Revisionism," though it has some problems, shows that Marx actually felt (and was incorrect to feel) at each revision of the Communist Manifesto over the decades, that the revolution was just around the corner, coming within the next decade or two, at the next depression, and thought it would happen in Germany.  But it never did.  Marx was like a preacher who sets a date for the Rapture, and then sets another date after the last date came and went, and on and on.

        "Arguments are to be avoided. They are always vulgar, and are often convincing." -- Oscar Wilde

        by Villagejonesy on Sun May 09, 2010 at 05:07:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Yikes! What a LIST!! What a DIATRIBE against (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greeseyparrot, dougymi, jds1978

    the SCLB.  The media hasn't had a liberal bias for DECADES, if ever.  That was just the original meme of the non-stop CONSERVATIVE LIES.

    What an incredibly timely post this is for me.  I just read an article in today's LA TIMES that highlights blogtalkmedia, a website that features, you guessed it, Conservative amateurs pretending to be Rush Limbaugh.  One woman has 8,000 listeners and, my fellow kossacks, I'm going to sign on to this website with my own show and give 'em all a run for their money!  I've got a great voice, tons of FACTS (you know, those liberal biased ones) and I'm going to expose the right wing LIARS for what they are.  I'll let you all know when my show will "air" and I'll get a huge listening audience fired up and ready to GOTV for DEMOCRATS come November!

    Peace, y'all!!!

    I guess President Obama meant it when he said he was just getting started!

    by Little Lulu on Sun May 09, 2010 at 04:15:39 PM PDT

  •  Well done. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dougymi

    But I can understand having a Republican Senator on a show or a pundit like William Kristol. They are at least in the case of the former, in the government, in the case of the latter, part of the press (holding my nose, cough cough per WK).

    What is unfathomable are the manufactured guests like Liz Cheney or Rudy Giuliani.

    BTW, old Nosferatu was on the telly today, calling respect for the Constitution "political correctness". I have two words for this liar's position that the Bush administration was more pro-active against terrorism -Bernie Keric, Bush's failed nominee for Homeland Security head; Giuliani's erstwhile bag man and limo driver and, more recently, a convicted felon.

  •  Another thing: (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Little Lulu, crankyinNYC

    'Liberal media" has nothing to do with the media being liberal.  It's a term used by Republicans and conservatives to label things that don't correspond with their beliefs, and to label news outlest that report or espouse those things, to label them as "other".  Republicans and conservatives really see those media as an enemy of sorts, or at the very least, disloyal.  That's why even white-bread, milksop centrist, middle-of-the-road stories and opinions are labeled as "liberal".

    I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.

    by TheOrchid on Sun May 09, 2010 at 04:18:16 PM PDT

  •  Alguien puede compilar una lista semejante (0+ / 0-)

    para Telemundo o Univision?

    Univision would probably have Jimmy Carter and Landon Donovan on as their Tokens.

  •  Excellent Report! (4+ / 0-)

    I was really looking forward to this.

    Regarding perception vs reality on left or right dominated media -- there's one thing we do know for sure:

    The American people are getting stupider and stupider every single day -- most intellectually corrupted to the far right, with spittle-filled proclamations about the hallucinatory and void of fact, politically-inspired lies pushed by our Corporate Overlords who own the five monopolies who control all messaging in the United States and carefully prevent any leak of reality and facts into the nation's political discourse.

    Expect more of the same, when it is profitable for our Corporate Owners to keep the American people stupid and uninformed.

    ::
    The Pluto Chronicles. You want reality? You can't handle reality!

    by Pluto on Sun May 09, 2010 at 04:28:15 PM PDT

  •  Thanks for taking the time to quantify this ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Situational Lefty

    ... it's interesting to see the stats in black and white.
     The window has moved so far to the right that I barely recognize the view anymore.

    " Son, some people are just no damn good " ~ N. S. Hobbs

    by jnhobbs on Sun May 09, 2010 at 04:30:14 PM PDT

  •  Either Reverse this Or Give it Up, People: (8+ / 0-)

    To add insult to injury, we not only have corporate monopolies controlling the political ignorance of Americans -- but we do not have a Fairness Doctrine, any longer, where both sides of a voting issue that will significantly affect people's lives and wellbeing -- must be presented.

    ::
    The Pluto Chronicles. You want reality? You can't handle reality!

    by Pluto on Sun May 09, 2010 at 04:36:32 PM PDT

    •  The fairness doctrine has many enemies (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pluto

      all crying free speech will be violated by it.

      Pelosi supports the return of the fairness doctrine

      Talk radio’s suspicions of a movement to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine were confirmed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) on Tuesday June 24 during her comments at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast. When John Gizzi, an editor for Human Events asked Speaker Pelosi whether she favored a return of the Fairness Doctrine, she told him an unhesitating "yes," reports Gizzi.

      But if you google/bing fairness doctrine many are crying free speech violation and warning..please sign this petetion outlawing the fairness doctrine. outlawing fairness..wow..

      So you are right Pluto with out equal play with the fairness doctrine & corporate monies increasing..where's the upside in the future?

      "you Are the Un-Americans, and You Ought to be Ashamed of Yourselves":Paul Robeson Appears Before HUAC

      by Eric Nelson on Sun May 09, 2010 at 05:53:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I don't watch those talk shows any more (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Billdbq

    We occasionally watch Keith (hubby has control of the remote after 6 p.m., so sometimes he puts soccer on), and sometimes half of Rachel--not that we don't like her, we do, but we have to go to bed by 9:30--and that's it.

    I refuse to watch the others, although for many years we watched "Inside Washington" and "McLaughlin Group."  Krauthammer and Crowley make me feel physically nauseated, so why should I subject my stomach to them?  I get most of my news from this site, or the BBC and Guardian.  And I get my good news from the Good News Network.

    Yes, I'm het, but I'm NOT a Mad Hetter!

    by Diana in NoVa on Sun May 09, 2010 at 04:51:13 PM PDT

    •  Also get most of my news from this site... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      vzfk3s

      Thanks, Meteor Blades, for this in-depth analysis of American media.

      As I watch very little news on TV, I read the local daily newspaper and catch the front page here and the Diaries, also visit another progressive news and commentaries site.

      My TV package doesn't include MSNBC, and CNN is seemingly always running commercials.  So I'll visit CSPAN or ESPN, then it's back to DKos!  

      Strength through Peace.

      by Billdbq on Sun May 09, 2010 at 05:11:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Very minor quibbles, using the label (4+ / 0-)

    'ultra-liberal' for David Corn. I don't see him as much more than a moderately left centrist, really. Corn is not socialist, he's not an outspoken pacifist or environmentalist, either. Calling out the lies of the Bush Cheney administration does not instantly impart a magic 'ultra-liberal' tag.

    And conversely, Bill Kristol is not 'ultra-conservative', either: I see him as a tool of corporations; Kristol wouldn't know an actual conservative value if it rose up and kicked him in the nuts. Like most so-called conservatives today, these racist greedy motherfuckers are interested only what they want and will use any tactic or distortion to maintain their sick perverse lifestyle. That's not 'conservatism', it's just being a bunch of greedy, self-centered assholes.
    I beg everyone: please stop using the label 'conservative' to describe the greedy corporate fascism, xenophobia, racism and religious fundamentalism that makes up "the right" and most of the Republican party now in this country.

    Please, stop legitimizing these crazy people who have no core values with the label 'conservative'.

    ---

    I'm actually surprised that there have been as many appearances by people like Krugman, Frank, even McCaskill, Klobuchar .. I think the next 'break out' would be how many minutes they were allowed to speak. It seems as if every appearance I've ever seen of someone from the center-left is either 'Elanor Clift-like', that they are barely able to get a word in edgewise and then stomped on immediately, or they are allowed to speak but there's zero analysis or discussion after they appear.  

    I say 'center left' because there's almost no "leftists" on that list.

    Using the House CPC as a general guide for what I'd call "mainstream liberalism", there's hardly an appearance of any at all.

    No Alan Grayson, Dennis Kucinich, Sheila-Jackson-Lee, Barbara Lee, Jan Schakowsky, Raul Grijalva, John Conyers, Keith Ellison .. ..oh, OK Keith Ellison appeared once, I think because of some 'Muslim issue' and they wanted his "input".

    Generally, if you are a member of the House CPC, you need not appear on any Sunday talk shows.  

    How to fight the fascist right? Register people to vote.

    by shpilk on Sun May 09, 2010 at 05:02:14 PM PDT

    •  I already stopped (0+ / 0-)

      I beg everyone: please stop using the label 'conservative' to describe the greedy corporate fascism, xenophobia, racism and religious fundamentalism that makes up "the right" and most of the Republican party now in this country.

      I use terms like "right wing," "hard right," "extreme right" and "teabagger."  "Conservative" is a word I use to describe people like my girlfriend, who voted for McCain, easily accepted Obama as her president and wants nothing whatsoever to do with the teabaggers.

      The only part of my country I'm ashamed of, is Sean Hannity.

      by dwayne on Sun May 09, 2010 at 07:56:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Only somewhat related.A Tale of Two Blogospheres (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Billdbq, Eric Nelson

    I came across this article in dutch about The political left blogosphere; Researchers at the Berkman Center for internet and society at Harvard conclude:

    Based on qualitative coding of the top 155
    political blogs. Sites on the left
    adopt more participatory technical platforms; are comprised of significantly fewer sole-authored
    sites; include user blogs; maintain more fluid boundaries between secondary and primary
    content; include longer narrative and discussion posts; and (among the top half of the blogs in
    our sample) more often use blogs as platforms for mobilization as well as discursive production.

    Dailykos get's quite a few mentions.

  •  Twenty million shut-ins (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Billdbq, Eric Nelson
    Who watch Faux News and listen to talk radio so they can reassure themselves Obama is secretly a Moslem born in Kenya.

    They dominate the audience because they're more likely to have free time than the average working person who likely also has to raise a family.

  •  What can corporations make us Believe? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dwayne

    Childhood lying techniques are ingrained & work

    Bash your opponent with the crime you yourself are guilty of.
    If you're lying... liberals lie

    If you're racist.. liberals are racists

    If you're fucking the middle class in favor of corporations welfare..liberals are socialists

    If the military industrial complex is a corporate welfare fraud/raiding... liberals are weak pussies

    If you are a dominionist..liberals are all somewhat gay and gay marriage will lead to fucking  animals.

    If the Overton window is right to hard right..liberals control the media LO fucking L

    Why does this work for the Republicans? Corporate media analysts have figured out the lies that work the best are the lies that we learned as chilren.
    They keep it simple. Facts, honesty, science, truth means nothing.

    Belief is the only thing that matters. What can the Gop/coporations who control legislatures make us believe. That's it.

    Control our Beliefs.

    "you Are the Un-Americans, and You Ought to be Ashamed of Yourselves":Paul Robeson Appears Before HUAC

    by Eric Nelson on Sun May 09, 2010 at 05:14:58 PM PDT

  •  Idea for DK4 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dwayne

    Let´s have a "Fair Debate" group, not unlike the Rescue Rangers. Folks would volunteer to screen their favorite news sources, be it print or television.

       Each time known falsehoods get repeated, it gets recorded by outlet, author/reporter and editor/producer. (a db would really help!)

       A "response group" creates some a-la-carte responses that include documented and linked facts that group members can email to the outlet while demanding a correction.

       Members of the media who repeatedly pass misinformation, earn a letter-writing campaign to their boss.

       Weekly or monthly reports get posted to the FP here, so everyone can see who the worst offenders are, and to shine (documented) daylight onto the slime they are perpetuating.

       Good performances could elicit positive feedback and public expressions of gratitude.

    The goals are to establish a documented line between "credible" and non-credible media members, (including off-screen!) and apply pressure to media outlets to only use credible sources. A slow fight, but one we need to make. Right now everyone is getting away with lying because it doesn´t seem anyone cares. dKos can change that!

    Peace

  •  So - facts are tricky things... (0+ / 0-)

    Why does the "liberal media" myth survive?>

    Not all conservatives are paranoid, but all paranoids are conservative

    by DrWolfy on Sun May 09, 2010 at 06:38:41 PM PDT

  •  It started with Edith Effron, who wrote the (0+ / 0-)

    book called "The News Twisters". But really this is also a testament to the failure of Democrats to effectively use the media and get out their message ultimately. And they've know it for years, if not decades.

    I've heard all the excuses for years as to why a liberal Fox would never work. Or why "there is no money" (Another excuse that I don't buy because there also wealthy liberals out there).  But I think that a major problem is that the left doesn't have a similar media outlet like Fox or talk radio.

    I've said it over and over again, but Democrats and liberals lack the means to engage in effective persuasion. They don't know how to use the media to their advantage and they don't know how to stay on message.  

    One other thing: Your post is really, really long. It would be much better if you had simply posted your top findings at the beginning and then put the rest of your data below the fold. I say this because a lot of people will not bother to read it because it is really long, and you won't get your message across.

    And this is my key point here. People aren't going to take the time to read a long post even if it has good arguments. I would have been brief to the point, stated the facts, and then referred people to go below the fold to find out more.

  •  I am so sick and tired of hearing what Rethugs (0+ / 0-)

    think, feel, want....etc, etc.

    This article illustrates what we sadly know...the cables, TV Media is CENTER/RIGHT leaning and only asks what the GOP wants, feels and its outcomes.

    Sadly, the media is not on our side at all.

    "Alan Grayson is my hero...now thats a Real Democrat"! alnc.10/09

    by alnc on Sun May 09, 2010 at 08:07:20 PM PDT

  •  Data? (0+ / 0-)

    We don't need no stinking data. Conservatives have proven over and over again that they believe what they believe. There's no amount of data that's going to sway their opinions.

    You've performed an enormous amount of work. You are to be congratulated but we knew this. Media Matters and others have shown us beyond a shadow of a doubt that the liberal media may include Democracy Now but that's about it. Keith and Rachel come from the center.

    As the media has become more and more corporatized, it has moved more and more to the right. NBC, ABC and CBS are hunks of their former selves.

    Again, nice post.

    Be involved! http://www.whereistheoutrage.net

    by ecthompson on Sun May 09, 2010 at 08:42:03 PM PDT

  •  Does anybody but get-a-life political weirdos... (0+ / 0-)

    watch these Sunday shows? Or are they just where vacuous talking points for the coming week are trotted out?

    I keep trying to be REALLY pissed at Democrats. But every day Republicans prove they're 1000X worse.

    by masswaster on Sun May 09, 2010 at 08:57:41 PM PDT

  •  Distorting the Numbers (0+ / 0-)

    To have a more accurate figure, you need to add the current and former politicians from the Obama Administration to these numbers.
    Joe Biden – 7; Hillary Clinton, – 15; Rahm Emanuel – 5; Janet Napolitano – 5; Barack Obama – 2; Kathleen Sebelius  – 15.
    Republicans: Ray LaHood – 1;

    So that's 49 Dems, 1 Rep.

    So it's not 315-242 in favor of Republicans, it's 316-291 (52.1% Republican, 47.9% Democrats).

    And then you need to really figure out the left-right-middle allocation of the reporters and commentators to get an accurate number on ideological bias, which seems pretty evenly split overall.

    One query: do you have a link to comparable figures from the Bush Administration years on Sunday talk shows, because we normally expect the party with the presidency to get more guests.

    Obama Politics (www.obamapolitics.com) and Limbaugh Book (www.limbaughbook.com).

    by JohnKWilson on Mon May 10, 2010 at 05:51:31 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site