A new poll released by Scott Rasmussen Friday identified that by almost a two to one margin, people believe the media are liberally biased.
As you might imagine, for the most part, those that don’t see it this way are registered Democrats.
Go figure.
Regardless, the data was quite illuminating to say the least (emphasis added throughout):
By a 39% to 20% margin, American adults believe that the three major broadcast networks deliver news with a bias in favor of liberals.
Maybe even more amazing, according to this survey, “25% believe that ABC, CBS, and NBC deliver the news without any bias.”
How’d you like to be part of that addle-minded minority? But I digress:
Similar results are found for CNN and National Public Radio (NPR). By a margin of 33% to 16%, Americans say that CNN has a liberal bias. The nation’s adults say the same about NPR by a 27% to 14% margin.
Yet, here’s a stunner that is sure to rattle the nerves of liberals everywhere:
When it comes to delivering news without bias, 37% believe NPR accomplishes that goal. Thirty-six percent (36%) say the same for Fox and 32% believe it’s true of CNN.
So, almost the same number of people who think that NPR is fair and balanced feel the same about Fox. Maybe the Democrats should start boycotting NPR, too.
Not withstanding, there were other fascinating findings in this survey:
For example, among self-identified liberals, all of the media outlets are believed to have some net bias in favor of conservatives. However, 50% of liberals say that NPR is unbiased. Forty-three percent (43%) say the same about CNN. As for the major television networks, 49% of liberals believe they have a conservative bias. Just 10% of liberals see a liberal bias at ABC, CBS, and NBC.
Can you imagine the intellectual capacity of someone who believes that ABC, CBS, and NBC are conservatively biased? Must be the same people who think Michael Moore’s films are actually documentaries, and Al Gore is more qualified to make climate prognostications than accredited meteorologists and climatologists.
On a related topic, another Rasmussen study found that Americans are equally divided about the controversial Fairness Doctrine:
Americans are evenly divided as to whether or not the government should “require all radio and television stations to offer equal amounts of conservative and liberal political commentary.” The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 41% favor that proposal and 41% are opposed.
[…]
A large segment of the public would like to extend the concept of the Fairness Doctrine to the Internet as well. Thirty-four percent (34%) believe the government should “require web sites that offer political commentary to present opposing viewpoints.” Fifty percent (50%) are opposed.
[…]
Thirty-six percent (36%) of Americans believe that “there are more conservative radio talk shows because they get better ratings than liberal talk radio.” Twenty-seven percent (27%) believe “there are more conservative talk shows because the station owners are biased and don't want liberal shows on their station.” Another 16% believe there is some other reason for the imbalance.
Yet, the following was most unsettling:
An interesting dynamic of the public debate is that liberals are more supportive of the “Fairness Doctrine: than conservatives. Liberals support the measure by a 51% to 33% margin while conservatives are opposed by a 48% to 40% margin.
40 percent of conservatives are in favor of reinstating the Fairness Doctrine? These most be folks not reading NewsBusters.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
}}----> Like, DUH! America
July 15, 2007 - 01:04 ET by Cool ArrowDo y'all realize the power Fox News Channel could wield if they could go Mainstream rather than Extended Cable?
We have a local Fox station here, but they don't have an evening News.
Wow, all they would have to do is funnel Shep Smith and/or Brit Hume thru their entertainment channel and reach a ton of malleable minds.
Smith and Hume could suddenly stuff Katie and Brian into the cellar.
And think of the story placement possibilities during American Idol season.
I too agree that Fox
July 15, 2007 - 09:09 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasI too agree that Fox would do well in the ratings if they started an evening national newscast via their national network. I myself have said this many times. Couric is falling into the barely over 5 million viewers NATIONALLY. Fox cable opinion shows at night get close to 2 to 2 1/2 million viewers so I have no doubt they would start up with some strong competition and easily win additional viewers from all 3 networks.
Shut up and blog! If you claim to be a conservative, please don't disgrace yourself and conservatism by thinking and arguing like a liberal. Go Rudy!
Sounds like a pretty impres
July 15, 2007 - 04:37 ET by Jack BauerSounds like a pretty impressive consensus that the media is dominated by lib***l commentary and lib***l thought control.
The debate is over.
That's right, Jack. As the
July 15, 2007 - 05:57 ET by motherbeltThat's right, Jack. As the AGW proponents say: the science is settled; there is a concensus; the debate is over.
Poll
July 15, 2007 - 05:07 ET by pocomoco” Twenty-seven percent (27%) believe “there are more conservative talk shows because the station owners are biased and don't want liberal shows on their station.”
It’s a conspiracy – a conspiracy, I say. Don’t bother us with the silly theory of ‘supply and demand’.
There is definitely something nefarious going on here with radio station owners. They hate us, that’s what it is, they hate us.
( Stay tuned next week when we bring you a report on those same 27% who think the moon is made of green cheese)
A large segment of the publ
July 15, 2007 - 06:34 ET by motherbeltA large segment of the public would like to extend the concept of the
Fairness Doctrine to the Internet as well. Thirty-four percent (34%)
believe the government should “require web sites that offer political
commentary to present opposing viewpoints.”
This is the part that really frosts me. First of all, how the heck do they think that can be enforced? Secondly, and perhaps most important, this tripe that every time someone expresses an opinion an opposing opinion must also be offered is jaw-dropping. Life is simply not like that, any more than any group that gathers together for whatever reason has to be made up of a "diverse" selection of people.
Some time ago I saw a poll that showed more than 1/3 of the respondents thought the first amendment went too far, and that there should be more restrictions on speech that "might" offend someone. Something like political correctness written into law.
Heaven help us.
"Some time ago I saw a p
July 15, 2007 - 10:45 ET by MikeB"Some time ago I saw a poll that showed more than 1/3 of the respondents thought the first amendment went too far, and there should be more restrictions on speech that 'might' offend someone." Those respondents should read Ray Bradbury's Farenheit 451. We can have some really nice book and newspaper burnings, because everybody's viewpoint is offensive to someone. Rush Limbaugh's books will be burned by liberals, while conservatives can burn Al Franken's. The next logical step from the government will be to outlaw reading, then to outlaw thinking. Oh, wait, we have the public school system: never mind.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
50% of liberals say that NPR
July 15, 2007 - 08:25 ET by NoMoreClintons50% of liberals say that NPR is unbiased.
So that means that roughly the other half of the liberals polled think it is biased? But in which direction? I'd really like to know the answer to that one.
"40 percent of conserv
July 15, 2007 - 09:00 ET by Reality Check"40 percent of conservatives are in favor of reinstating the Fairness Doctrine? These most be folks not reading NewsBusters."
This is again because of the press reporting. If, for example, they were calling it the UN-FAIRNESS Doctrine, and explaining what it DOES, many of these people would be opposed. That's what they would do with legislation that would count up liberal press outlets and mandate conservative alternatives.
It all gets back to bias. It's why sites like this one are so important.
Reality Check
Without wanting to be the dev
July 15, 2007 - 10:10 ET by USnotU.S.Without wanting to be the devil's advocate, wouldn't we expect that kind of perception right now?
I mean, the media is always going to be hard on the encumbent government during a war; especially a war that is losing popularity. It's the same in Australia right now, with the media having plenty to say about a conservative government that is pro war, and yet it's the flipside here in the UK, with an unpopular left wing government in favour of the war, and a seemingly conservative bias in the media.
the media is always going to
July 15, 2007 - 10:20 ET by botgthe media is always going to be hard on the encumbent government during a war
1943 - London?
"The more I study science, the more I believe in God." Einstein
Ok, I was treading gently. I'
July 15, 2007 - 10:28 ET by USnotU.S.Ok, I was treading gently. I'm talking about now, and I was trying not to say "unpopular war" too many times, but I believe that would be the main factor. I don't think it reflects fully on the Bush Admin being conservative.
Okay, you have a point with T
July 15, 2007 - 10:35 ET by botgOkay, you have a point with Tony Blair being liberal and getting negative press. Part of the reason the war is unpopular is the lack of reporting the many negative stories about the terrorists. Have you read about the baking of children?
"The more I study science, the more I believe in God." Einstein
Yes; a little. I too, find it
July 15, 2007 - 11:40 ET by USnotU.S.Yes; a little. I too, find it hard to understand why it wouldn't be widely reported. I wouldn't have thought it would be a liberal v conservative issue. An atrocity is still an atrocity.
My hat is off to the soldiers fighting there, just for staying sane.
If you think the Bush "
July 15, 2007 - 11:54 ET by Jack BauerIf you think the Bush "administration" is conservative you are even more deluded than I first thought.
President Bush has some fine qualities. But being a conservative in a political, governmental and economic sense is not one of his strong ones.
He let Ted Kennedy write the Education and Immigration bills. He's consistently kicked his conservative friends in the teeth, and he's pissed away so much good will from the conservative base it's hard to see him ever coming back.
Maybe you missed it, but actual conservative Republicans just battered the hell out of the immigration bill he put all his weight behind.
So please, if you want to be taken seriously here, don't make such a basic error. You sound like some dopey European who believes what he's fed by an Institutionally Leftist press.
A conservative bias is whic
July 15, 2007 - 11:50 ET by Jack BauerA conservative bias is which media?
I do hope you are not erroneously suggesting the British media has an inherent "conservative" bias.
If you are, you are gravely mistaken. The BBC, BBC radio, the Guardian, The Independent, The Observer, Sky News, Channel 4, The Mirror ... you have to know that the British media is Institutionally Leftist on all levels.
Even Britains top selling tabloid (The Sun) which is supposedly conservative, endorsed the British Labour (Socialist) party at the last two general elections.
I think you've misinterpreted
July 15, 2007 - 12:42 ET by USnotU.S.I think you've misinterpreted something I said, as I wasn't being at all confrontational. I just think that it's natural right now, for the media to be stacked against the encombant governments if they are in favour of the war.
The war is unpopular. No one would argue with that, so the media is stacked against conservative governments in the US and Australia, and against a liberal government in the UK. That's why Gordon Brown is trying seperate himself from Blair at the moment.
If it were peace time, I think it would be more even.
That's all I meant. Just an idea, hey.
Although, in the interests of
July 15, 2007 - 13:12 ET by USnotU.S.Although, in the interests of good manners, you might want to keep your dopey European comments to yourself.
Why usnot? Hurt your feelers?
July 15, 2007 - 13:14 ET by bassndudeWhy usnot? Hurt your feelers?
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
LOL!you are replying to your
July 15, 2007 - 13:15 ET by botgLOL!
you are replying to your own comment calling it dopey : )
Those reading this thread wil
July 15, 2007 - 13:28 ET by USnotU.S.Those reading this thread will understand.
And no, my feelings aren't hurt. I wasn't saying anything to insult, so there was no need for insults from JB, who incidentally (if you are going to be petty) likewise replied to himself.
"Only two things are infinite; the universe and the stupidity of the human race, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein
USi understood, it just came
July 15, 2007 - 13:34 ET by botgUS
i understood, it just came off as funny
I believe Einstein came to the conclusion that the universe is not infinite about the same time he removed the 'cosmological constant' in his equations which made them appear to support that proposition
"The more I study science, the more I believe in God." Einstein
I don't think so. I'll make w
July 15, 2007 - 13:40 ET by Jack BauerI don't think so. I'll make whatever comment I like, to whoever I like. But thanks for the advice.
This isn't a vicar's tea party, it's a robust site where people have strong opinions. If you're more concerened with your definition of "good manners," you might want to DU off to somewhere more genteel... like Daily Kos.
I'm sure it is a robust site,
July 15, 2007 - 14:02 ET by USnotU.S.I'm sure it is a robust site, but I didn't call you a dopey American, and the reaction would have been pretty full on if I had. Tell me I'm wrong.
Besides which, Australia isn't in Europe.
best to ask Jack where he liv
July 15, 2007 - 14:10 ET by botgbest to ask Jack where he lives
"When you assume" Felix Unger
USnot - What did you know, and when did you know it?
July 15, 2007 - 14:19 ET by Free StinkerLet's ask USnot where he lives.
And why he is hiding this information!
Good afternoon Jack...Speakin
July 15, 2007 - 14:08 ET by bigtimerGood afternoon Jack...
Speaking of genteel sites that reminded me of HuffnPuff's site....
I just got done listeneing to the screeching of E. Clift and A. Huff herself on The Mclaughlin Group....very hard to take...two at once....EEEEK!
LOL....
Wotcha BT. Omigod.After tha
July 15, 2007 - 14:13 ET by Jack BauerWotcha BT. Omigod.
After that fright night maybe take a mogadon and relax for a week. The former Arianne Stassinopolus!
What a woman, she marries a billionaire and turns him gay.
Jack...LOL...Yep, she was the
July 15, 2007 - 14:26 ET by bigtimerJack...
LOL...
Yep, she was the death of him!
Gee, looks like the pollsters
July 15, 2007 - 12:10 ET by drillanwrGee, looks like the pollsters accidentally turned the page in the phone book on that one. Or someone slipped them one (phone book) from the Anytown, fly-over states because they lost the San Fran and NYCity phone books.
Half the Truth
July 15, 2007 - 13:32 ET by Com_n_senseBullsh*t! The only reason anyone would think this is because that's what the MSM pundits TELL THEM is true. If anyone was exposed to even what England's news agencies are like they would see just how FAR RIGHT they are here.
But what can you expect from a nation where 80% of the citizens never travel abroad and are feed a line of crap from the very few corporate owned media outlets in the country. Which brings up this fact, I would challenge any of you to look up who OWNS the media in this country and tell me how you can call any of them "liberal"?
hhttp://www.thenation.com/special/bigten.html
If you people heard even half of the truth of what's really going on, even you 29%er's might even get up-set. But I doubt it. Some shells are just too hard to crack.
You come to a site devoted to
July 15, 2007 - 13:43 ET by botgYou come to a site devoted to exposing left-wing media bias to say the media is right wing?
LOL botg .. What do you exp
July 15, 2007 - 13:54 ET by Jack BauerLOL botg ..
What do you expect from a quasi-commie mental case?
So far left in fact, they make the US mainstream media positively right.
This is how their tiny minds work: case studies in illogicality, hatred and childishness.
JB, you should be in politics
July 15, 2007 - 14:33 ET by USnotU.S.JB, you should be in politics.
Just not sure which planet.
"I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully." GW Bush
Com...go hereSave a SeAL, clu
July 15, 2007 - 13:47 ET by bassndudeCom...go here
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
CNS
July 15, 2007 - 14:16 ET by Noel SheppardCNS,
Fascinating. So, you admit to being part of the 49 percent of liberals that believe the networks are conservatively biased. Marvelous.
Now, since you cited the Nation, can you tell us whether you view that magazine as being conservative, moderate, or liberal? This will act as a benchmark for the rest of us to understand what your actual grasp of reality is. ns
LOL! "The Nation",
July 15, 2007 - 16:31 ET by Del DolemonteLOL! "The Nation", he says.
Thanks for the laugh.
Com_n_sense, For someone wh
July 15, 2007 - 16:42 ET by hydrodynDMCom_n_sense,
For someone who likes to present themselves as a purveyor of "truth", it's funny how juvenile (and unoriginal) your argument is.
You suggest that it's an obvious fact that the MSM is biased to the right because of who it's owned by.
Many on this site suggest that the MSM is biased to the left because of who puts together and presents the news.
Two opposing theories. Which is right? Well - and try to follow along here - to determine that, you have to actually look at how the MSM does it's job. You know, actually see if the news they present (or don't present) suggests a bias.
You see, Com_n_sense, the reality of a situation isn't dictated by theory - it's dictated by, well, the reality of the situation.
So if you want to work your way through the archives of this site and explain, post by post, why all of the examples of liberal bias sited here are, in fact, in error, I'd love to see it.
That or you can take the intellectually lazy rout and just stick to your theory.