Quote:
Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan
Do you also have a list of Fox news contributors that donated to Democrats' campaigns?
|
Don't know about this campaign but media voting habits in America have been fairly well established through a lengthy period of time . . . .
In 2008, media contributions favoured Democrats by a ratio of 100 to 1.
Individuals who reported being employed by major media organizations made the following contributions:
NBC, NBC Universal: $104,184 to Democrats / $3,150 to Republicans
CBS: $45,508 to Dems / $966 to Republicans
ABC: $17,320 / $4,717
Turner Broadcasting, TBS: $30,161 / $3,950
Fox: $40,573 / $0
Fox News/Fox News Channel: $1,280 / $0
MSNBC: $210 / $282
CNN: $2,286 / $1,250
Associated Press: $2,550 / $545
Reuters: $10,745 / $3,450
Washington Post, Newsweek: $4,268 / $0
New York Times, NYT Co: $8,143 / $0
Time, Inc: $40,988 / $4,850 ($2,300 to Republicans was from someone identified as a jeweler, so the total may actually be $2,550)
Time Magazine: $1,250 / $0
USA Today: $6,067 / $0
Totals for the above: $315,533 to Democrats ; $22,656 to Republicans
Ironically, an MSNBC staffer the previous year, measuring from 2004 to the start of the 2008 campaign, did a research project which also revealed journalist campaign contributions massively favoured Democrats over Republicans.
MSNBC.com identified 143 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign, according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 16 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113485/
The charts below are fairly well-known . . . . .
http://www.mrc.org/biasbasics/biasbasics3.asp which, it's easy to see, is a fairly biased site in itself. . . . . although they've got a lot of genuine ammunition. Nevertheless, the material it uses in the charts isn't a big secret or a heart-stopping surprise when added to everything else, including the money trail.
To be clear, both sides of the political spectrum claim the other side is favoured by media. This is classic psychology defined by a famous phenomenon called "Hostile Media Phenomenon," the subject of this landmark study:
http://www.zaxistv.com/sociology/pop...fMediaBias.pdf You can clearly see the psychology of this exhibited in this thread.
You know you've found a decent media outlet when both sides claim the outlet is biased against their side. That means the outlet is likely treating subject matter fairly evenly handed.
Unfortunately, in an increasingly partisan age when the paying consumer can easily find places that reinforces an already pre-established opinion they might have, therefore helping them prove how smart they are to themselves . . . . . . . having a slant is what pays the freight.
On the other hand, it is fair to say the average consumer has never had access to as broad a range of information sources and opinions as today.
Rare, however, is the consumer who doesn't mind flipping between MSNBC and FOX to hear what everyone is saying, then making up his/her own mind.
Cowperson