False Bias

Jamison Foser makes something of a definitive take on the charge of "liberal bias" that our friends on the right have been chirping about for over 30 years.

Read the whole thing and commit it to memory. The points made about the NYT and Bill Clinton serve as the research to what I've known all along while having these conversations on this blog. My burden having a memory that predates 2002, I suppose.

The itemization of how our rightwing friends conflate "bias" with "positive/negative" generalizations is also worth noting. According to the extended logic of the right, it would be "biased" to report polling that shows Obama ahead in any poll.

This reminds me of a conversation I had with a friend during Victoria Osteen's trial a few months back. Said friend insisted that the media were out to take down Joel because of their bias. Nevermind that one of those stations was airing Joel's sermons on Sunday morning. I asked what evidence he had of this "bias." Apparently, it was that the news stations were pointing out that Victoria's testimony and the flight attendant's didn't match up. So, basically a non-arguable point of fact central to the story and that really didn't affect a reader's view of either side ... now served as bias.

Apparently that's the same thing that registers as bias to those wishing to make a political case and to game the ref.

ADD-ON: And for one of the most recent datapoints shredding the "liberal bias" myth, Steve Benen notes that CNN had a "View From the Right" on the election Saturday night. Want a view from the left? ... or the middle? Not happening.