Comments on: Implicit Ideological Bias http://enableate.com/steve/2007/866 make it happen Sat, 19 May 2012 23:30:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2 By: steve http://enableate.com/steve/2007/866#comment-12250 steve Thu, 08 Nov 2007 06:15:58 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2007/866#comment-12250 You should post more. I need more libertarian representation on the blog. It gets old having to defend the principle of truth, justice, and the American way all by myself. You should post more. I need more libertarian representation on the blog. It gets old having to defend the principle of truth, justice, and the American way all by myself.

]]> By: boose http://enableate.com/steve/2007/866#comment-12236 boose Tue, 06 Nov 2007 20:59:19 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2007/866#comment-12236 I resent (not really) the "you all." I may not comment on everything, but i'm still here i swear. I resent (not really) the “you all.” I may not comment on everything, but i’m still here i swear.

]]> By: steve http://enableate.com/steve/2007/866#comment-12217 steve Tue, 06 Nov 2007 06:22:00 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2007/866#comment-12217 Sigh one more person completely oblivious to MSM bias. Man there seems to be another ending flow of you guys. Sigh one more person completely oblivious to MSM bias. Man there seems to be another ending flow of you guys.

]]> By: Dan http://enableate.com/steve/2007/866#comment-12216 Dan Tue, 06 Nov 2007 03:29:16 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2007/866#comment-12216 "At the time you saw the MSM as fair broker of news." I don't recall making this claim. I could be wrong, but wasn't my argument all along that your explanation of the mechanism for MSM bias wasn't persuasive? Anyway, the study is showing evidence that the MSM has a democratic bias so far this election cycle... although I could poke holes in their methodology such as vague metric and such, let's take it at face value for the sake of argument. First off, democratic bias and liberal bias are not necessarily synonymous. Maybe there is some other characteristic of the democratic candidates that causes them to be more appealing to the MSM than the republican candidates (for example, perhaps the Democratic campaign donors are more likely to also be advertisers). Also, this is a relatively small sample size, given that it is only a single election. For a study to demonstrate the extent of systematic bias you are suggesting, it would have to cover multiple election cycles. Basically, I think the conclusion you are drawing is premature from the evidence presented. It's an interesting line of observation, but more carefully controlled studies would be necessary to broaden the claim to what you seem to be suggesting. “At the time you saw the MSM as fair broker of news.” I don’t recall making this claim. I could be wrong, but wasn’t my argument all along that your explanation of the mechanism for MSM bias wasn’t persuasive? Anyway, the study is showing evidence that the MSM has a democratic bias so far this election cycle… although I could poke holes in their methodology such as vague metric and such, let’s take it at face value for the sake of argument. First off, democratic bias and liberal bias are not necessarily synonymous. Maybe there is some other characteristic of the democratic candidates that causes them to be more appealing to the MSM than the republican candidates (for example, perhaps the Democratic campaign donors are more likely to also be advertisers). Also, this is a relatively small sample size, given that it is only a single election. For a study to demonstrate the extent of systematic bias you are suggesting, it would have to cover multiple election cycles.

Basically, I think the conclusion you are drawing is premature from the evidence presented. It’s an interesting line of observation, but more carefully controlled studies would be necessary to broaden the claim to what you seem to be suggesting.

]]> By: Jamie http://enableate.com/steve/2007/866#comment-12214 Jamie Tue, 06 Nov 2007 01:50:21 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2007/866#comment-12214 I understand what you are saying, but this country has already been through the "uniqueness" of a candidate of a different religion. When John F. Kennedy secured the white house it was news because he was a catholic president. This broke the mold of the protestant stronghold on American politics. I for one am excited about the fact that republican candidates are out of the mold of normal republican candidates. Rudy is pro-choice and mitt is mormon. I just don't think it is as interesting to the general public as black or female. It's a subtle difference, but one that is out there. I understand what you are saying, but this country has already been through the “uniqueness” of a candidate of a different religion. When John F. Kennedy secured the white house it was news because he was a catholic president. This broke the mold of the protestant stronghold on American politics. I for one am excited about the fact that republican candidates are out of the mold of normal republican candidates. Rudy is pro-choice and mitt is mormon. I just don’t think it is as interesting to the general public as black or female. It’s a subtle difference, but one that is out there.

]]>