UCLA does a media bias survey

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » December 19, 2005, 10:14 am

http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=6664

They matched voters to politicians, and from the politician rankings they matched their speech patterns and citations to news agencies' reports.

Kinda neat

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » December 19, 2005, 11:41 am

Tim Groseclose is the same researcher you linked a paper from a couple of years ago about "media bias".

The same Tim Groseclose who has been funded and/or employed by the Heritage Foundation.

Did he disclose his bias?

This looks like the same project from a couple of years ago, just a press release from the University office, announcing it was published. Mr. Groseclose probably navigated that press release fairly well, and congratulations to him for that. There is nothing untoward there in making sure your work is promoted.

Again the point that Mr. Groseclose has been (or still is) funding in the past by a conservative thinktank and wishes to claim that he can study "media bias" with impartiality is laughable at best.

but that won't stop Hannity, O'Reilly, et al. from using this "UCLA researchers....U-C-L-A....the liberal california university..."

doesnt take much imagination. Anyway, probably exactly why the Heritage Foundation funded the guy is specifically for something like this. Generating a propaganda talking point.

check! and here's your check.

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » December 19, 2005, 3:25 pm

The link details efforts made to reduce researcher bias.

Where did they screw up Voronwe? What questionable research method did they use?

The researchers took numerous steps to safeguard against bias — or the appearance of same — in the work, which took close to three years to complete. They went to great lengths to ensure that as many research assistants supported Democratic candidate Al Gore in the 2000 election as supported President George Bush. They also sought no outside funding, a rarity in scholarly research.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » December 19, 2005, 3:40 pm

The Drudge Report may have a right-wing reputation, but it leans left.

Only Fox News' "Special Report With Brit Hume" and The Washington Times scored right of the average U.S. voter.

Yes, I'm sure that's accurate...

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » December 19, 2005, 3:53 pm

Zaelath how can you quote that and yet omit the very next paragraph?

"One thing people should keep in mind is that our data for the Drudge Report was based almost entirely on the articles that the Drudge Report lists on other Web sites," said Groseclose. "Very little was based on the stories that Matt Drudge himself wrote. The fact that the Drudge Report appears left of center is merely a reflection of the overall bias of the media."

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » December 19, 2005, 3:58 pm

Adex_Xeda wrote:Zaelath how can you quote that and yet omit the very next paragraph?

"One thing people should keep in mind is that our data for the Drudge Report was based almost entirely on the articles that the Drudge Report lists on other Web sites," said Groseclose. "Very little was based on the stories that Matt Drudge himself wrote. The fact that the Drudge Report appears left of center is merely a reflection of the overall bias of the media."

Because it's a nonsense.

If the Drudge Report introduces "Here's more bleeding heart liberal garbage": and links something far left, that doesn't make them left leaning.

And COME ON, are you seriously telling me you don't think there's a problem with their methodology if they could only find a single segment on Fox that leans right? O'Reilly is left leaning because he's constantly referring to left leaning publications? Oh sure, he's purely citing them to deride them, but he's just such a fucking hippy.

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » December 19, 2005, 6:00 pm

A cookie for the person who finds the howlingly obvious problem with this methodology...

His data is totally skewed...

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » December 19, 2005, 6:06 pm

Arborealus wrote:A cookie for the person who finds the howlingly obvious problem with this methodology...

His data is totally skewed...

There are several, and here's a picture: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/%7Emyl/langua ... 01169.html

However, I still think the biggest problem is they don't make it clear if the citation of a given "think tank" is critical or not.

Based on their methodology Midnyte is a left-wing nutjob.

Chmee · Post by **Chmee** » December 19, 2005, 6:23 pm

Personally, I think the whole hunt to try to determine political bias in the media is kind of silly these days. There are so many news sources available from so many points of view that it really is kind of moot. Almost equally futile is trying to determine the validity of something based off the funding of whatever organization created it. In both cases its more important to maintain a certain amount of skepticism and to try to determine the validity of the argument itself rather than trying to spend all your time trying to divine the motives of the people making it.

Hesten · Post by **Hesten** » December 19, 2005, 6:51 pm

Zaelath wrote:Based on their methodology Midnyte is a left-wing nutjob.

Well, theyre half right then