Can media bias be ranked? This website thinks so. Feedback, please!

[prescole]

Call me crazy, but I've spent the last few months trying to quantify the political orientations of Internet news sites.

www.newsprism.com ranks some of the web's best news and commentary sites from far left to far right. I'd appreciate your feedback...whaddaya think?

[DainBramaged]

1. So, this is your site? Self-promotion?

[Zen Democrat]

2. CNN had someone on recently with an analytical study of liberal media.

This guy said that although the NYTimes and Washington Post are considered "liberal", that the Wall Street Journal actually registers more liberal content than either NYTimes or WP. This doesn't include the editorial page, which is wingnut right for the WSJ, but the reporting in the WSJ was considered more liberal than either NYTimes or WP.

When the most liberal outpost of the mainstream media is the Wall Street Journal, what does that say?

[DainBramaged]

3. This looks like nothing more than links

[prescole]

6. Well, DUH. And yes,

I was hoping to get thousands of hits with this post. Pure self promotion. Not interested in thoughtful comments at all.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[prescole]

9. Now you're YELLING. Thoughtful indeed.

If you can't see the relevance of media bias to progressive discussion of salient issues, that's your problem.

[prescole]

4. I read something similar about the NYT

It said that the Times is considered liberal, but that the content is actually more moderate to conservative. Goes to show you that "bias" is VERY relative.

[AllieB]

26. The readers of the NY Times are liberal; the content hardly qualifies

Most of the articles follow the administration's line, with the exception of Paul Krugman and a few others.

[prescole]

30. Great point. There was an economist who tried to measure media bias

by comparing how popular newspapers are in various cities that are known to be more liberal or more conservative. He found some correlation between circulation of papers and the left/right demographics of particular cities.

This begs the question: why would liberals read a conservative paper? Because of the quality of the journalism? Maybe because of a lack of choice? Which suggests a lack of good liberal journalism driving liberals to more centrist outlets.

[AX10]

15. The Wall Street Journal's main paper coverage is considered to be...

fair. The Paper's only bias is in it's Editorial Pages (hard right wing/off the deep end).

[prescole]

32. Very high quality journalism, no doubt.

And it wound up near the center in my rankings, maybe skewed a tad to the right by the op/ed page.

I'm curious--you say the WSJ is "considered to be fair"--is that based on more progessive people's opinions, like here at DU, or are you speaking more generally?

[Stevepol]

5. Good idea but what's the standard of judgment?

It would be good if there were some objective way of measuring this bias stated.

I think there's also a problem in that media in the US are decidedly not liberal so how can you put CNN for example as "liberal"? I know Rush Limbaugh has said that, but it makes no sense. CNN and the rest of the mainstream media outlets try to be as near the middle of the opinion stream as possible, or what they imagine as the middle. But the middle in the US has been redefined so far to the right that even the so-called middle outlets are decidedly right. IMO anyway.

[prescole]

8. There are two standards, one more objective, the other subjective

The subjective standards come from other media scholars (I'm a professor of mass comm) who rank sites based on their own news judgment and experience. I wish there were a more precise way to measure political orientation, but that would be like measuring love or freedom or beauty--the concepts are way to fuzzy to approach purely scientifically.

The objective standards come from an idea I got from www.newsknife.com, which runs various Google searches to measure the relevance and timeliness of news stories run on hundreds of news sites. Google's algorithms are some of the best around, and since they involve actual traffic, they include the judgments of literally millions of web users. So in a way, using Google is pretty democratic (small "d") and more objective than simply asking the opinions of people who have some expertise.

And I'd love to hear ideas on other criteria that could be used...though it's a very touchy subject that few people will ever agree on!

[Wickerman]

10. I think it's a great concept, but my own bias might be reflected

in how I personally viewed it. I wanted to look across the prism and compare. You know, New York Times with Drudge Report. :wtf: Probably not the way the comparison is meant to go. And, I'd like to see how you derived the rankings. It's probably in the about section but consider me the avg lazy user - tell me up front.

[prescole]

12. Thanks. See reply above for more details. nt

[DainBramaged]

11. I'd be interested in "evaluations by selected scholars. " Who are they?

[Name removed]

13. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ellenfl]

14. i think it's good to have all those links in one place.

thank you, prescole, for trying to do something helpful. two comments from me . . .

1. shouldn't faux news be more to the right?
2. my experience is that lat is more to the left than nyt and wp

i'm assuming, of course, that you have placed the links in order of degree.

ellen fl

[prescole]

17. Yes, far left to far right.

Your points are exactly what I'm looking for, and exactly what the site is meant to provoke.

On TV, Fox News is very personality-driven, and the personalities certainly lean strongly to the right. Roger Ailes and company have created a news outlet that is more concerned with entertaining than informing, I think, and they have positioned themselves ideologically to profit from the relative lack of conservative news. (Though the balance has changed a lot, to where the "liberal media" is a very poor description.)

The web site is more news-driven and I think a bit less conservative, though at the bottom of the site all the personalities get to have their say and promote their shows.

Honestly, FoxNews.com does belong a bit further to the right IMO.

As for the LAT, NYT, and WP, the shades of difference are definitley subtle and hard to pin down precisely.

Thanks, I appreciate your feedback!

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[prescole]

23. No, and yes.

I'm not a member of the Junto Society, though they have posted some of my writing in the past. I assume you think that makes me a troll or something?

I was the announcer at the 2004 Libertarian National Convention, however. Ah, the shame, the shame!

Also, I think the private affiliations and the names of DUers should remain private and should not be used to disparage or "out" those with whom you disagree.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[prescole]

27. Yes, it's public knowledge, but

it's not hard to see what your motives are. You have no interest in this discussion, except as a disrupter.

But thanks for adding some controversy, which always draws attention, in a sort of Jerry Springer way.

[TheBaldyMan]

18. there is a media analysis group at the University of Glasgow

they are respected internationally and have been working for many years now on, amongst other things, measures of media bias.

their website can be accessed at the link below
Glasgow University Mass Media Unit

well worth a look and you may get some leads on how to measure 'bias' within a given medium.

[prescole]

20. That's awesome--thanks! nt

[Ron Green]

19. I would put the bottom of the "V" at about the LA Times and CBS News.

How about that?

[prescole]

21. Hmmmm...I think they're both relatively liberal/progressive, but you

bring up a real pickle for me...where the heck is the Center?

I think most conservatives see the center as further right, and most liberals see it as further left, which is one of the things I'd like to study more thoroughly.

It's interesting that if the LAT and CBS were at the center of the V, the media overall would seem to have a strong conservative slant (assuming these rankings have any validity at all!) I have to admit that as a younger, more liberal person, I thought the media were pretty conservative overall, whereas today (middle age and more moderate) I see a slight tilt to the left overall, with the media approaching some kind of balance.

[Ron Green]

31. It would seem a fair arrangement to put the center where the publication

or outlet gives a true balance between embracing the ruling power and discrediting it. For example the term "War on Terror" is used without question or attribution in many "mainstream" sources, while it hasn't been shown that this "war" is anything more than a distraction from this Administration's efforts at Empire building. I would expect a media source in the true center to give equal time to challenging the powers that be as well as supporting them.

[prescole]

33. Wow, two super ideas there--using the Establishment as an anchor or

center, and using key words like "War on Terror" as a way to judge bias. I wonder what other key words might unveil a source's tendencies?

Thanks much.

[Ron Green]

34. You could set up a matrix of values for some key words.

Homeland Security
Guest Worker
Energy Independence
Sustainability
Privatization
Death Tax
Living Wage
"The Enemy"

The list could go on and on, but the key would be to somehow quantify these terms in a way that would yield the bias of a media source according to how each term is used and how often.

[SPKrazy]

22. Here's my take

American Prospect
TheNation
Huffington Post
Salon
Slate


Everything else goes on the right hand side and moving out in that order.

As I see it we have no real left leaning mainstream corporate media.

I suggest as a good read, "What liberal Bias?" by Eric Alterman.

[prescole]

25. The elusive Center!

Seems we all have different ideas about where the center really is--it's quite a slippery concept.

It seems that you pretty much agree with the order of the rankings, though?

And I should definitely read Alterman's take...or should have already read it, to be honest.

[EFerrari]

29. I think that relationally, you are right on the money. n/t

[EFerrari]

28. You know, I just thought almost exactly the same thing.

The difference is you think Salon is lefter than I do. :)

[SPKrazy]

35. And I am probably way wrong about Salon

I've only read it online for free, and then only on occasion.

So I'm not really that familiar with it.