• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

New study shows MSNBC even more biased than Fox News


borntorum

Well-known member
Joined
May 26, 2008
Messages
12,805
How's this for Fair and Balanced? A new Pew study in the US shows that in the final stages of the US Election Campaign, liberal MSNBC was even more pro-Obama than Fox was pro-Romney.

Throughout the campaign, the two most popular cable news channels, Fox News and MSNBC, stood out from the rest the media coverage. Fox News was much more positive about Romney than the press as a whole and substantially more negative about Obama. MSNBC was even more overwhelmingly negative about Romney and offered mostly positive coverage about Obama.

During the final week of the campaign, those differences became even more pronounced.
That week, when the media overall were more positive about Obama than negative, Fox News went a different direction and became more negative about him. From October 1 to 28, 4% of Obama's stories were positive and 47% were negative (a difference of 43 points). In the final week, however, that tenor changed so that 5% of Obama's stories were positive while 56% were negative-a difference of 51 points.
At the same time, when Romney was receiving negative coverage in the final week from the rest of the press, Fox was different; 42% of its segments about him were positive while only 11% were negative. This was more positive than the earlier part of October when 34% of Fox News' Romney coverage was positive and 9% negative.
MSNBC moved in the other direction. MSNBC's coverage of Romney during the final week (68% negative with no positive stories in the sample), was far more negative than the overall press, and even more negative than it had been during October 1 to 28 when 5% was positive and 57% was negative.
For Obama, meanwhile, the coverage improved in the last week. From October 1 to 28, 33% was positive and 13% negative. During the campaign's final week, fully 51% of MSNBC's stories were positive while there were no negative stories at all in the sample.
Final Weeks in the Mainstream Press | Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ)

Here in Democrat-loving Ireland, Fox News is a byword for media bias. The sort of ar$eholes who think reading the Irish Times makes them sophisticated will stroke their chins and tell you how, like, terribly right wing FNC is. I wager that many of those people don't know that there exists a left-wing equivalent of Fox in MSNBC, although I have to admit to being surprised to see that it is even more biased than its rightly derided rival. There's a scathing attack on the 'progressive' media's obsequiousness towards Obama in (of all places) The Guardian that's well worth a read:

Hendrik Hertzberg proclaims that they will now be even "more respectful" of Obama than they have been. Short of formally beatifying him, or perhaps transferring all their worldly possessions to him, is that even physically possible? Is there a reverence ritual that has been left unperformed, swooning praise left to be lavished upon him, heinous acts by him that have not yet been acquiesced to if not affirmatively sanctioned in the name of keeping him empowered? That media progressives will try to find ways to be even "more respectful" to the president is nothing short of scary.
Progressive media claims they'll be 'tougher' on Obama now | Glenn Greenwald | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

The fact that MSNBC more closely accords to the prejudices of the majority of Irish people (including myself) shouldn't blind us to the fact that it is as active in the propaganda game as Murdoch's station.
 

Analyzer

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
46,201
Media objectivity does not always occur. The listener has to educate themselves as to the bias of the different media operations.

The only issue for Irish people is why you get forced to pay a tax to a quango that pays millionaires obscene amounts of money.

And if the people don't pay there is a threat of a jail sentence to get them to pay up.
 

titmouse

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2012
Messages
442
How's this for Fair and Balanced? A new Pew study in the US shows that in the final stages of the US Election Campaign, liberal MSNBC was even more pro-Obama than Fox was pro-Romney.



Final Weeks in the Mainstream Press | Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ)

Here in Democrat-loving Ireland, Fox News is a byword for media bias. The sort of ar$eholes who think reading the Irish Times makes them sophisticated will stroke their chins and tell you how, like, terribly right wing FNC is. I wager that many of those people don't know that there exists a left-wing equivalent of Fox in MSNBC, although I have to admit to being surprised to see that it is even more biased than its rightly derided rival. There's a scathing attack on the 'progressive' media's obsequiousness towards Obama in (of all places) The Guardian that's well worth a read:



Progressive media claims they'll be 'tougher' on Obama now | Glenn Greenwald | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

The fact that MSNBC more closely accords to the prejudices of the majority of Irish people (including myself) shouldn't blind us to the fact that it is as active in the propaganda game as Murdoch's station.
The reason MSNBC is so liberal is as a counterbalance to Fox, who started it all. And you can't deny it's objectively true that Fox are more biased in favour of stupidity and ignorance, represented by right of the Republican party.
 

ManOfReason

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
4,328
Someone had to do a study to figure that out? These channels don't do news they do partisan ego massaging for people who want to think they are well informed but never what to hear anything that might contradict they shallow misconceptions. MSNBC are the worst - even Rachael Maddow, who should know better.
 

NYCKY

Moderator
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Messages
13,098
This comes as no surprise but I don't expect to hear too much about it here.

Regardless of the bias, people actually watch Fox, nobody watches MSNBC.
 

Nermal

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
1,327
What exactly is this evidence of? Is 'non-biased' reporting the same number of 'positive' and 'negative' stories about someone? What if there are more 'positive' stories about Obama to report?

Can I make a complaint somewhere that the BBC are being biased about Jimmy Savile? Can't remember the last 'positive' story written about him.

'Project for Excellence in Journalism'? Pathetic, really.
 

NYCKY

Moderator
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Messages
13,098
Interesting article here on a once promising network. Maybe it's not too late for them.

As ratings plunge, MSNBC faces shakeup - Dylan Byers - POLITICO

The low turnout wasn’t a fluke: Year-to-date, MSNBC’s daytime viewership is down 21 percent overall and 41 percent in the coveted 25-to-54-year-old demographic, putting it in fourth place behind Fox News, CNN and CNN’s sister network HLN. Its prime-time ratings are down 24 percent and 42 percent, respectively. In both daytime and prime time, MSNBC is bringing in its smallest share of the demo since 2005
The network had become so partisan it has even turned off its core audience.

Lack, a former NBC News president, is likely to rein in MSNBC’s ever-leftward drift and focus instead on creating more news-driven programming, with more involvement from NBC News talent.
This would be a welcome change. Last year, the coverage of Bridgegate and Christie was relentless and the viewers voted with their remotes.

In an ironic twist

Despite its own ratings setbacks, “Morning Joe,” the three-hour morning talk show anchored by former Republican congressman Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski, is among the network’s most influential — and lucrative — programs.
 

Thomaso12

Active member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
172
It's no surprise that would turn out like that, since majority of media is biased and ran on political agendas.
 

dammit_im_mad

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
9,118
Who cares

Both parties are funded by the same corporate and financial vested interests and essentially support the same policies with minor cosmetic differences

Then the idiot US public keep playing along with the kabuki theatre for the masses that is the US electoral process by voting them in.

George Carlin sums the latter part up quite well! :p

[video=youtube;07w9K2XR3f0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07w9K2XR3f0[/video]
 

stopdoingstuff

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 26, 2011
Messages
22,897
Interesting article here on a once promising network. Maybe it's not too late for them.

As ratings plunge, MSNBC faces shakeup - Dylan Byers - POLITICO



The network had become so partisan it has even turned off its core audience.



This would be a welcome change. Last year, the coverage of Bridgegate and Christie was relentless and the viewers voted with their remotes.

In an ironic twist
I love how the news channel has decided that one way to improve is to be more "news driven". That's the clearest admission yet from anyone on any side of how far from the truth the mainstream media has drifted.
 

edward2222

Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Messages
22
This comes as no surprise but I don't expect to hear too much about it here.

Regardless of the bias, people actually watch Fox, nobody watches MSNBC.
I agree, how much more if CNN and BBC will join the chaos? :shock:
 

daveL

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 29, 2010
Messages
19,593
How's this for Fair and Balanced? A new Pew study in the US shows that in the final stages of the US Election Campaign, liberal MSNBC was even more pro-Obama than Fox was pro-Romney.



Final Weeks in the Mainstream Press | Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ)

Here in Democrat-loving Ireland, Fox News is a byword for media bias. The sort of ar$eholes who think reading the Irish Times makes them sophisticated will stroke their chins and tell you how, like, terribly right wing FNC is. I wager that many of those people don't know that there exists a left-wing equivalent of Fox in MSNBC, although I have to admit to being surprised to see that it is even more biased than its rightly derided rival. There's a scathing attack on the 'progressive' media's obsequiousness towards Obama in (of all places) The Guardian that's well worth a read:



Progressive media claims they'll be 'tougher' on Obama now | Glenn Greenwald | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

The fact that MSNBC more closely accords to the prejudices of the majority of Irish people (including myself) shouldn't blind us to the fact that it is as active in the propaganda game as Murdoch's station.
who commissioned that study?
 

jcdf

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 8, 2005
Messages
3,778
What exactly is this evidence of? Is 'non-biased' reporting the same number of 'positive' and 'negative' stories about someone? What if there are more 'positive' stories about Obama to report?

Can I make a complaint somewhere that the BBC are being biased about Jimmy Savile? Can't remember the last 'positive' story written about him.

'Project for Excellence in Journalism'? Pathetic, really.
Go back far enough in time and you will find positive stories about Jimmy Savile on the BBC. They never fired him like they did Jeremy Clarkson.

All news media has to have some bias I think. Is it even possible to have a point of view without bias? I think not.

News media requires funding that has to come from some individual's or group's pocket. Unless a group of totally impartial individuals could find a very rich person to fund them, whose indifferent to what they actually wrote, they would not be able to produce anything.

What a person can do, in order to partially counter the bias of a variety of media outlets, is consume from a wide range of different media outlets.
 

NYCKY

Moderator
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Messages
13,098
The problems continue for MSNBC.

The MSNBC ratings keep getting worse - POLITICO.com

Just when you thought things couldn't get any worse for MSNBC, along came the quarterly ratings reports.

In both daytime and prime time, MSNBC endured its lowest quarterly demo numbers in a decade, and its total viewership since the final quarter of 2007. Prime-time viewership was down 45 percent in the demo from the first quarter of 2014, while daytime viewership was down 39 percent in the demo.
But things are still looking grim for MSNBC: Between the hours of 12 p.m. and 4 p.m. on Monday, for instance, more people were watching Al Jazeera America than MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell, Thomas Roberts and "The Cycle."
Al Jazeera had a very hard time getting into the US market as they were perceived as both anti American and anti Semitic as well as being the mouthpiece of Al Qeada by more extremist opinion. They bought Al Gore's "Current TV" that nobody watched and well now are able to beat even MSNBC.

It must really stick in the craw of Rachel Maddow, Al Sharpton, Chris Matthews and the others that the network has to resort to trumpeting the show of a former Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough to show any good news at all.

MSNBC chose to focus on the month of March instead, where it boasted gains in prime time and a victory for "Morning Joe" over CNN's "New Day."
 

Ren84

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 14, 2011
Messages
50,016
Isn't a shame that American news channels have to adopt a position on the political spectrum rather than, you know, report the news instead.
 

NYCKY

Moderator
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Messages
13,098
Isn't a shame that American news channels have to adopt a position on the political spectrum rather than, you know, report the news instead.
That's a good point but part of the problem IMO is that often there just ins't enough "news" to fill a 24 hour cycle and in slow times the news just gets recycled, like Sky News if there is no big story going on. Quite often, they recycle the clips even when there is a big story unfolding.


The major news US networks don't like to do this and thus have these editorial type discussion programs particularly during prime time. That said, it seems that some are better at it than others.
 

Telstar 62

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2013
Messages
26,928
The problems continue for MSNBC.

The MSNBC ratings keep getting worse - POLITICO.com





Al Jazeera had a very hard time getting into the US market as they were perceived as both anti American and anti Semitic as well as being the mouthpiece of Al Qeada by more extremist opinion. They bought Al Gore's "Current TV" that nobody watched and well now are able to beat even MSNBC.

It must really stick in the craw of Rachel Maddow, Al Sharpton, Chris Matthews and the others that the network has to resort to trumpeting the show of a former Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough to show any good news at all.

 

googolplex

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2013
Messages
676
Go back far enough in time and you will find positive stories about Jimmy Savile on the BBC. They never fired him like they did Jeremy Clarkson.

All news media has to have some bias I think. Is it even possible to have a point of view without bias? I think not.

News media requires funding that has to come from some individual's or group's pocket. Unless a group of totally impartial individuals could find a very rich person to fund them, whose indifferent to what they actually wrote, they would not be able to produce anything.

What a person can do, in order to partially counter the bias of a variety of media outlets, is consume from a wide range of different media outlets.
What news media also requires, is access to leads within the government to first cover announcements, even if you have ample private funding, this access can be shut down, so msm has to be agenda driven. Constant bombardment of msm news in public places can be a problem, so lets take a referendum to ban all news publication in all public places (unless it is an emergency), and have only uplifting music, this has a double role in making people more inclined to i, nteract in a social way in their surroundings, but also increase their motivation to spend into the economy, if they feel positive. So a ban on all the msm's misery announcements, that don't affect us, ye, or ne?
 

storybud1

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 25, 2011
Messages
6,741
yep, Astrology ? that about sums up his intelligence and business model of selling racism to his audience, the Indo dips into journalism now and again, the Times and Examiner are long gone into liberal mouthpieces .

The Savita tragedy finished me with Irish papers, no waiting for the coroners report just loads of pro-abortion agenda sh1te when responsible journos would have waited for the facts.

These businesses are PR for many types of agendas, Looking at Obama , he is a clown that reads autocues very well and does what the democrats want, same ould sh1te on the other side,
 
Top