The bias was in the question and the criteria you use to establish "liberal" (what is that exactly?). Go back and try Google News: fetus abortion. The first story is religiously oriented and fairly even as far as a religious discussion. I have say, though, that the Chinese don't think a baby gets a soul till its first birthday and I didn't see that POV in the article, so it too seems biased toward western religion. If the news was biased as you say, then the first story should have been family planning, about a new abortion clinic or something like that. It isn't.
The second story has this embedded in it...
Groups that support a woman's right to an abortion said they feared that giving a fetus legal rights to health insurance coverage could be used as a backdoor attempt to establish legal rights for the unborn child -- rights that could conflict with the pregnant woman's rights.
However, Landwehr, who opposes abortion, has stated her proposal has nothing to do with abortion.
You seem convinced of something that isn't true despite the facts - this is called a "belief". If you say "I believe the media is biased toward the liberal POV", I can't argue with that - it is your opinion. If you say it is, a statement of fact like the "sky is above the horizon", then you should be willing to do the statistical analysis to prove it. I find this type of analysis very interesting but I don't think you can prove it because I believe the media has gotten less critical of the status quo. You may choose to say I believe wrongly (without proof) - I'm not willing to prove mathematically a point to someone who's strongest arguments are based upon beliefs. |
