Bias Has Consequences

You may also like...

8 Responses

  1. Adrian Durlester says:

    Don’t really agree with much of what’s said here, but found the article worthy of a retweet because there is clearly a lot of ignorance in the media community about religion. That it is overwhelmingly liberal and anti-religion I don’t buy. That Fox and similar outlets are actually “centrist?” Gimme a break. Groseclose is living in some alternate reality. I’m not sure why you felt the need to bolster your case about media bias against religion by referring to this ridiculous book about so-called liberal bias in the media. It weakens rather than strengthens your case by its association with Groseclose and his poorly researched work.

  2. Raymond says:

    The Left-wing bias of the mainstream media is overwhelmingly obvious to anybody who does not share a similar Left-wing bias. As for that story with the dog being stoned to death, when I first heard it, I will admit that part of me was horrified that such a thing could occur. Then after a few seconds of more sober reflection, I realized that the story in itself was inherently absurd, as even the most Right-wing factions of Orthodox Jews simply do not behave in such a manner. The greatest of all Jewish theologians, namely the Rambam, always stressed a moderate, rational, Middle-of-the-Road approach to life, hardly the way of a fanatic. Jewish law in general similarly follows a moderate, down-to-Earth approach to life, and thus would not sanction stoning a dog to death on the allegation of being some disreputable character in some past incarnation. However, I may know all this, and my fellow traditional Jews may know all this, but the average person hearing that dog story may be clueless. So yes, the mainstream media did commit a grievous error, although not a surprising one, as it fits right into their anti-religious agenda.

  3. Michael says:

    Professor Timothy Groseclose is the Marvin Hoffenberg Chair of American Politics, and his research “focuses mainly upon Congress, media bias, and mathematical models of politics.” He is a tenured professor who has been on the faculty of several of the best universities in the country: Carnegie Mellon University, Harvard University, the Ohio State University, Stanford University, and Caltech. Even a short paper on the topic of “A Measure of Media Bias,” which was itself covered extensively in the news media, references dozens of other works and has 44 exhaustive footnotes: http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

    So Adrian can disagree with the Professor’s conclusions, but how can he call the work of such a high-achieving, if conservative, academic “poorly researched”? Simple — because as a denizen of the left, Adrian gets to make up his own facts (apparently, the “alternate reality” in which Groseclose lives is the real world, as compared to what the left dreams up). Adrian has no idea whether Prof. Groseclose’s research is poor or not, because the book hasn’t even been published yet. This is the very bias that Adrian claims doesn’t exist, not to mention the self-inflicted ignorance which most of the major media outlets help perpetuate.

  4. Shanks says:

    I don’t care if you taught geography at Oxford. If you think the world’s flat, you don’t know geography!

    If you think FOX News is centrist, you don’t know media!

  5. Simcha Younger says:

    The Rabbanut is actually incredibly good to women, to the point where there is no way to describe it as a halachic process, but if the truth gets out, that will make fundraising for all those poor women a bit harder.
    The vilification of the Rabbanut is useful both to give a bad name to religion, and to get al lot of sympathy, which means financial and legal benefits for women..

  6. Ori says:

    Adrian and Shanks have a point, of sorts. Professor Groseclose does not compare the media to some objective standard of bias. What he actually does is compare the bias of the media to the bias of the politicians (and presumably the voters that elected them). His results are that the media averages to the left of the electorate. Comparing either to reality is beyond the means of his technique.

  7. Raymond says:

    Fox News is centrist in the sense that it does try to present points of view from both sides of the political aisle. This is in sharp contrast to the other mainstream media, which only presents a Leftist view of the world. I find it revealing whenever anybody on the Left expresses hostility toward Fox News, as this is an indication of the complete intolerance that many on the Left have to anybody daring to challenge that Leftist point of view.

  8. Bob Miller says:

    Any news outlet, even the least biased, is not 100% factual, so be vigilant.

Pin It on Pinterest