Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : I Will Continue to Continue, to Pretend.... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (16609)	12/19/2005 2:00:50 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

All things considered, the results were startling. But keep in mind that it still was done by the Poly Sci Dept at UCLA. As we know most of them nationwide are dyed in the wool liberals. And the evidence they provide to claim they were objective was tenuous at best. Their methodology of determining bias would not include any evaluation of "news analysis", which are opinion pieces disguised as news that many papers regularly run on the front page. Similarly, their established methodology did not consider the numerous false, misleading & biased comments (stated as fact) journalists now regularly interject in hard news stories. Another item not measured would be when critical information contrary to the left wing slant of a story is simply left out. And Editorials, opinion pieces & commentaries were not part of the study. This is what they measured.... <<< ....They tallied the number of times each media outlet referred to think tanks and policy groups, such as the left-leaning NAACP or the right-leaning Heritage Foundation. Next, they did the same exercise with speeches of U.S. lawmakers. If a media outlet displayed a citation pattern similar to that of a lawmaker, then Groseclose and Milyo's method assigned both a similar ADA score..... >>> ....and they still found a considerable liberal bias.