I am sure that everyone here will be amazed that this group
came up with the conclusion they did. Nobody involved with
this survey was in favor of our invading Iraq or voted for
Bush. They are drinking their own bathwater
From: LindyBill
I added my 2¢ worth in the edits below.
"The Project for Excellence in Journalism is affiliated with the <Edit - liberal> Columbia University School of Journalism. The study was funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts."
Report: Iraq Coverage Wasn't Biased in Either Direction
Mar 13, 2005
By David Bauder
The Associated Press
NEW YORK (AP) - A study of news coverage of the war in Iraq fails to support a conclusion that events were portrayed either negatively or positively most of the time.
The Project for Excellence in Journalism looked at nearly 2,200 stories on television, newspapers and Web sites and found that most of them couldn't be categorized either way.
Twenty-five percent of the stories were negative and 20 percent were positive, according to the study, released Sunday by the Washington-based think tank.
<Edit - Yup, we're fighting a GWOT & doing a good job despite corruption at the UN & many of its core countries who were bribed by Saddam (which the MSM mostly ignored until AFTER the election). The vast majority of the negative "news" was anti-Bush & anti-war BS, while very little of the positive news was pro-Bush or positive about the GWOT be it in Iraq or anywhere.>
Despite the exhaustive look, the study likely won't change the minds of war supporters who considered the media hostile to the Bush administration, or opponents who think reporters weren't questioning enough, said Tom Rosenstiel, the project's director.
"There was enough of both to annoy both camps," he said. "But the majority of stories were just news."
<Edit - Oh really? It must be hard to see the bias in so-called "straight news" stories that distort & deceive, while written from a liberally biased, anti-Bush, anti-war POV.>
Rosenstiel said most people understand the complexities of what is going on in Iraq, how continued suicide bombings can happen at the same time as a successful election.
<Edit - Yes, it's amazing so many Americans could see that despite being bombarded with stories about "Bush lied" before he took "unilateral", "illegal" actions to get his "war for oil" that led to the Iraqi "quagmire" that would have the Arab street infuriated, where Bush & Runsfeld personally approved the horrific torture at Abu Ghraib, while they continued to slaughter innocent Iraqi's, blah, blah, blah, ad nauseam.>
The three network evening newscasts tended to be more negative than positive, while the opposite was true of morning shows, the study said. Fox News Channel was twice as likely to be positive than negative, unlike the more evenhanded CNN and MSNBC, the study said.
<Edit - Note the spin again. The big three have by far the largest audience & they were the most negative. Any objective review of the facts would establish CNN & MSNBC have an obvious liberal bias. Instead these libs have concluded that it couldn't possibly be that Fox was more reality based & there really was twice as much positive going on than negative. Oh no, the liberal MSM couldn't have possibly misled everyone with their negative slant like we know they did on so many of their "straight news" stories.>
A more limited look at campaign coverage found that 36 percent of stories on President Bush were negative, compared to 12 percent for Democrat John Kerry. Stories were positive 20 percent of the time for Bush, 30 percent for Kerry, said the project, which examined some 250 stories for tone.
<Edit - Even their limited sample shows an obvious liberal bias.>
"I don't know whether this was because he was the incumbent or because a lot of the coverage of the campaign was filtered through events in Iraq," Rosenstiel said. "It's probably a little of both."
<Edit - Note the spin again. Once again these libs have concluded that it couldn't possibly be that
Kerry had a serious lifelong problem with facts & reality, he flip-floped on almost every major issue & that he had acted in a treacherous manner as an avid anti-war activist. And Kerry, the DNC & the 527's ran a negative campaign that got a lot of coverage as "straight news". Noooo, these libs spoke with the sure knowledge that the "filter" (read liberal version of reality) comming from Iraq was all "straight news", not the liberal MSM's perceived, exaggerated & sometimes manufactured negatives they reported as fact (many of which have been discredited as time & events unfolded).>
The project's annual study of the state of journalism found that the idea of categorizing people as getting their news primarily from television or newspapers is becoming outdated. A Pew Research Center poll of 3,000 people last spring found that more than one-third of news consumers regularly check out at least four different kinds of news outlets, among the Web, newspapers, magazines, radio and local, national or cable TV.
Americans are now "news grazers," the study said.
Throw in Web logs, and "everyone is getting this sort of Mixmaster blend of journalism," Rosenstiel said. "Traditional journalism is a smaller part of that mix than it used to be."
<Edit - the liberal MSM still remains the main source of news for a vast majority of Americans.>
Yet the project found that much of the investment in the news business goes to packaging information instead of gathering it. More than half of people at Web news organizations surveyed by Pew said they had seen cutbacks in their newsrooms over the past three years.
The notion that Americans are headed toward a more partisan form of news consumption isn't borne out by research, Rosenstiel said. With the exception of Republican cable news viewers who prefer Fox, most media consumption mirrors the population in general.
<Edit - What a load of liberal spin. Conservatives prefer Fox because they are sick & tired of being lied to by all the other liberal MSM outlets - HELLO?>
The Project for Excellence in Journalism is affiliated with the Columbia University School of Journalism. The study was funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts.
<Edit - the very liberally biased Columbia University School of Journalism>
AP-ES-03-13-05 1411EST
This story can be found at: ap.tbo.com |
