Media balance: does the ‘liberal/lefty’ agenda rule?

[St Disibod]

I’ve lifted this from another thread ('a banana costs more than my house') because I didn’t want to drag that one off course. It started when the original poster finished off by stating that:

Zimbabwe, one of the world's less talked about problems...

And that is a fair enough statement, but then some rowed in behind it a bit more aggressively:

Corruption gone mad. Not talked about as it doesn't involve the US, UK or Israel.

Unfortunitly true. Mention bananas and everyone starts talking about Zimbabwe. Talk about the actual statistics on the ground like inflation reaching 512,000% by year end and zero interest:

http://www.politics.ie/viewtopic.php?t=23119&highlight=

Maybe more fruit referances is whats needed to stir up interest in the absence of some of the standard liberal/lefty targets.

I think this charge that a story has to have a ‘liberal/lefty’ agenda to gain currency across our media outlets is one that needs to be countered. I don’t consider it accurate. For one, Zimbabwe is quite well documented if one reads newspapers. There are far less documented incidences- Chechnya comes to mind alongside many others. And there are plenty of stories that don’t have anything to do with a ‘liberal/lefty’ agenda that are very well covered- Darfur being a prime example.

But rather than just state my opinion, I thought I would do a very rough form of analysis to back up my point. It’s a bit sketchy, but I think it should put this myth to bed. I have taken five separate issues: Israel/Palestine, Darfur/Sudan, Zimbabwe, Guantánamo and Chechnya. I could understand people saying Israel/Palestine and Guantánamo are ‘liberal/lefty’ topics, but the other three could hardly be described as such. My measurement is to take newspaper headlines in the last six months across four different publications: The Irish Times, The Financial Times, The Economist and the New York Times. And in case anyone wants to check, I used the Lexis Nexis archive to do the search.

For the number of articles with a headline mention in the last six months, the results were as follows:

The Irish Times
Israel/Palestine 62
Darfur/Sudan 41
Zimbabwe 18
Guantánamo 14
Chechnya 2

The Financial Times
Israel/Palestine 53
Darfur/Sudan 47
Zimbabwe 35
Guantánamo 12
Chechnya 1

The Economist
Israel/Palestine 30
Darfur/Sudan 7
Zimbabwe 9
Guantánamo 5
Chechnya 1

New York Times
Israel/Palestine 86
Darfur/Sudan 65
Zimbabwe 35
Guantánamo 31
Chechnya 5

I think one could point to a bias, Guantánamo regularly features while Chechnya does not- but then it is very hard to get information on Chechnya; but it is hardly as absolute as some make it out to be.

[Akrasia]

If the media had a left wing bias, then announcements of wage increases would be reported as good news instead of 'Oh no!! Our competitiveness!! we're all doomed" And announcements of record multi billion euro profits would be reported as the theft that they are instead of good news stories.

If the Media had a left wing bias, then there would be a big chunky labour affairs section in every paper and a small business section. Instead, there isn't even a labour affairs section, all labour related stories are reported as bad news in the business section.

[Leftfemme22]

If the media had a left wing bias, then announcements of wage increases would be reported as good news instead of 'Oh no!! Our competitiveness!! we're all doomed" And announcements of record multi billion euro profits would be reported as the theft that they are instead of good news stories.

If the Media had a left wing bias, then there would be a big chunky labour affairs section in every paper and a small business section. Instead, there isn't even a labour affairs section, all labour related stories are reported as bad news in the business section.

Looks like attemts are being made to import this ''Liberal Media Bias" nonsense from the US.

Its a fall back position of the Wingnuts when the media actually report the truth.

[farnaby]

Irish media is liberal. Socially and economically. This makes it both left-wing and right-wing. Can you apply the political compass to a newspaper?

[Defeated Romanticist]

It seems that no-one is happy with th newspapers. Those of us on the right are spitting fire every-time we open a paper(thats why you should never get onto a bus with a lib-con;fire hazard) and the left also seem dissatisfied. Surely that every-one(that counts) is unhappy is a sign that the papers are afterall balanced?
Heaven forbid.

[merle haggard]

do i have to repost that letter about the role of the Irish times in Irish society?

[Defeated Romanticist]

Yes please do I didn't see it.
I do remember Geraldine Kennedy saying that she saw the role of the media as one of constant opposition.

[merle haggard]

Yes please do I didn't see it.
I do remember Geraldine Kennedy saying that she saw the role of the media as one of constant opposition.

Unfortunately the reality is her role is editing whatever news is deemed permissable and ensuring the correct slant is applied to the issues a foreign military intelligence agency deems fit for Irish consumption through the pages of the Irish Times . Ms Kennedy initially ignored the emergence of this letter from the British national archives under the 30 year rule concerning the British intelligence community discussing how best they can utilise the Irish Times being put at their disposal by the Irish Times Trust . She only acknowleged its existence when the Indo publicised it .

[Tiernanator]

With someone like Mr Murdoch having such a big say in the world media I doubt that there is a liberal/lefty agenda in most of the media.

[Rocky]

St. why didn't you include Iraq? I don't know how you did that, so if it's possible, can you add Iraq to your list. It would be interesting to compare the amount of media attention Iraq has got to Sudan because both conflicts have lasted for about the same length of time and roughly the same number of people are believed to have been killed.