|
Showing 1 - 2 of
2 matches in All Departments
Accusations of partisan bias in Presidential election coverage are
suspect at best and self-serving at worst. They are generally
supported by the methodology of instance confirmation, tainted by
the hostile media effect, and based on simplistic visions of how
the news media are organized. Media Bias in Presidential Election
Coverage 1948-2008 by Dave D'Alessio, is a revealing analysis that
shows the news media have four essential natures: as journalistic
entities, businesses, political actors, and property, all of which
can act to create news coverage biases, in some cases in opposing
directions. By meta-analyzing the results of 99 previous
examinations of media coverage of Presidential elections from 1948
to 2008, D'Alessio reveals that coverage has no aggregate partisan
bias either way, even though there are small biases in specific
realms that are generally insubstantial. Furthermore, while
publishers used to control coverage preferences, this practice has
become negligible in recent years. Media Bias proves that, at least
in terms of Presidential election coverage, The New York Times is
not the most liberal paper in America and the Fox News channel is
substantially more conservative in news coverage than the broadcast
networks. Finally, Media Bias in Presidential Election Coverage
1948-2008 predicts that no amount of evidence will cause political
candidates to cease complaining about bias because such accusations
have both strategic potential in campaigns and an undeniable
utility in ego defense.
Accusations of partisan bias in Presidential election coverage are
suspect at best and self-serving at worst. They are generally
supported by the methodology of instance confirmation, tainted by
the hostile media effect, and based on simplistic visions of how
the news media are organized. Media Bias in Presidential Election
Coverage 1948-2008 by Dave D'Alessio, is a revealing analysis that
shows the news media have four essential natures: as journalistic
entities, businesses, political actors, and property, all of which
can act to create news coverage biases, in some cases in opposing
directions. By meta-analyzing the results of 99 previous
examinations of media coverage of Presidential elections from 1948
to 2008, D'Alessio reveals that coverage has no aggregate partisan
bias either way, even though there are small biases in specific
realms that are generally insubstantial. Furthermore, while
publishers used to control coverage preferences, this practice has
become negligible in recent years. Media Bias proves that, at least
in terms of Presidential election coverage, The New York Times is
not the most liberal paper in America and the Fox News channel is
substantially more conservative in news coverage than the broadcast
networks. Finally, Media Bias in Presidential Election Coverage
1948-2008 predicts that no amount of evidence will cause political
candidates to cease complaining about bias because such accusations
have both strategic potential in campaigns and an undeniable
utility in ego defense.
|
|