And you wonder why we call it the "liberal media" ?

[bendog]

Finally, faux news explained in one sentence:

Just 7 percent of journalists are Republicans. That?s far fewer than even a decade ago.

Why would ANY intelligent person want to become a journalist?

Why?

Why would any republican want to be informed?

 

[rightwinger]

This finding is no surprise whatsoever.

Just 7 percent of journalists are Republicans. That’s far fewer than even a decade ago.

majority of American journalists identify themselves as political independents although among those who choose a side Democrats outnumber Republicans four to one, according to a new study of the media conducted by two Indiana University professors.

Write Lars Wilnat and David Weaver, professors of journalism at Indiana,*of their findings:

Compared with 2002, the percentage of full-time U.S. journalists who claim to be Democrats has dropped 8 percentage points in 2013 to about 28 percent, moving this figure closer to the overall population percentage of 30 percent, according to a December 12-15, 2013, ABC News/Washington Post national poll of 1,005 adults. This is the lowest percentage of journalists saying they are Democrats since 1971. An even larger drop was observed among journalists who said they were Republicans in 2013 (7.1 percent) than in 2002 (18 percent), but the 2013 figure is still notably lower than the percentage of U.S. adults who identified with the Republican Party (24 percent according to the poll mentioned above).


The great thing about this survey, called "The American Journalist in the Digital Age", is that its been conducted four previous times -- in 1971, 1982, 1992 and 2002. That allows for some fascinating comparisons of how partisanship (or the lack thereof) among reporters has evolved over that time.

Back in 1971, the first time this survey was conducted, there was simply more partisanship among reporters. *More than one in three (35.5 percent) said they were Democrats while more than one in four (25.7 percent) described themselves as Republicans. At that point, 32.5 percent called themselves independents.

Over the last several decades, three things have happened: 1) The number of Democratic-identifying reporters increased steadily prior to a significant drop in the latest survey 2) The number of Republicans has steadily shrunk with that number dipping into single digits for the first time ever in the new survey c) more and more reporters are identifying as independents. *What seems to be happening -- at least in the last decade - -is that journalists are leaving both parties, finding themselves more comfortable as unaffiliateds.

These numbers will likely affirm the belief in conservative circles that "all" reporters are secretly Democrats. (The study was conducted via online interviews with 1,080 reporters.) *While I am not in the business of disputing the study's finding, I would note two caveats:

1. This is among*all*reporters not just political reporters. While that may seem like a minor issue, it's worth noting that assuming these party ID numbers are true for those of us -- like me -- who cover politics day in and day out may not be entirely accurate.

2. The movement toward independent status among reporters is in keeping with a similar move in the broader electorate as they find the two parties increasingly rigid and, therefore, less welcoming.

The entire study, which details that journalists are less happy in their jobs than ever before and that most believe the industry is headed in the wrong direction, is*worth reading in its entirety.

Just 7 percent of journalists are Republicans. That?s far fewer than even a decade ago.

You are starting to sound like rdean with his "7% of scientists are Republican"

Doesn't mean they are against you.....just smart

 

[buckeye45_73]

I love it when people try and deny the point of the op. Most of the media is gayloving liberal. Ittakes breitberto uncover weinergate, drudge, leuwinski, but dam tom delay plays golf with someone its a top story, really?

 

[ClosedCaption]

I love it when people try and deny the point of the op. Most of the media is gayloving liberal. Ittakes breitberto uncover weinergate, drudge, leuwinski, but dam tom delay plays golf with someone its a top story, really?

Yeah because the patients run the asylum

 

[bendog]

yeah, thank God they discovered monica. I mean the country would have fallen had we not learned of the "stain." Proud moments in journalism.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

This finding is no surprise whatsoever.

Just 7 percent of journalists are Republicans. That’s far fewer than even a decade ago.

majority of American journalists identify themselves as political independents although among those who choose a side Democrats outnumber Republicans four to one, according to a new study of the media conducted by two Indiana University professors.

Write Lars Wilnat and David Weaver, professors of journalism at Indiana,*of their findings:

Compared with 2002, the percentage of full-time U.S. journalists who claim to be Democrats has dropped 8 percentage points in 2013 to about 28 percent, moving this figure closer to the overall population percentage of 30 percent, according to a December 12-15, 2013, ABC News/Washington Post national poll of 1,005 adults. This is the lowest percentage of journalists saying they are Democrats since 1971. An even larger drop was observed among journalists who said they were Republicans in 2013 (7.1 percent) than in 2002 (18 percent), but the 2013 figure is still notably lower than the percentage of U.S. adults who identified with the Republican Party (24 percent according to the poll mentioned above).


The great thing about this survey, called "The American Journalist in the Digital Age", is that its been conducted four previous times -- in 1971, 1982, 1992 and 2002. That allows for some fascinating comparisons of how partisanship (or the lack thereof) among reporters has evolved over that time.

Back in 1971, the first time this survey was conducted, there was simply more partisanship among reporters. *More than one in three (35.5 percent) said they were Democrats while more than one in four (25.7 percent) described themselves as Republicans. At that point, 32.5 percent called themselves independents.

Over the last several decades, three things have happened: 1) The number of Democratic-identifying reporters increased steadily prior to a significant drop in the latest survey 2) The number of Republicans has steadily shrunk with that number dipping into single digits for the first time ever in the new survey c) more and more reporters are identifying as independents. *What seems to be happening -- at least in the last decade - -is that journalists are leaving both parties, finding themselves more comfortable as unaffiliateds.

These numbers will likely affirm the belief in conservative circles that "all" reporters are secretly Democrats. (The study was conducted via online interviews with 1,080 reporters.) *While I am not in the business of disputing the study's finding, I would note two caveats:

1. This is among*all*reporters not just political reporters. While that may seem like a minor issue, it's worth noting that assuming these party ID numbers are true for those of us -- like me -- who cover politics day in and day out may not be entirely accurate.

2. The movement toward independent status among reporters is in keeping with a similar move in the broader electorate as they find the two parties increasingly rigid and, therefore, less welcoming.

The entire study, which details that journalists are less happy in their jobs than ever before and that most believe the industry is headed in the wrong direction, is*worth reading in its entirety.

Just 7 percent of journalists are Republicans. That?s far fewer than even a decade ago.

Is your position that a person with a political point of view is incapable of being objective?

Not necessarily, but when you have the media so over-represented on one side the likliehood that there's an overall slant in one direction is great.

 

[emilynghiem]

I have debated this issue with my bf who is in radio media.

What HE means by liberal media is the ownership, counting the owners as contributors to the Democrats and liberals. And FOX News sprang up to combat the liberal media bias exposed most visibly with the Dan Rather incidents, and the "24 hour news cycle" through online media that has opened the door to check this "media bias" called "liberal."

My friends on the REAL left (NOT the commercialized political "liberal/left" hijacked by Gore, Clinton, Obama for corporate support) will call these "corporate conglomerates controlling the media" CONSERVATIVE as THEIR word for capitalistic cronies hijacking govt.

Both sides are complaining about the same monopoly on mainstream media.

But one side compares it to the TRUE LEFT, and blames the monopoly on CONSERVATIVE interests.

The other side compares it to the REAL CONSERVATIVES (not the extreme rightwing that makes for good ratings, nor the RINO's sold out to mainstream politics to stay in office)
and complains the media bias is LIBERAL (based on what the Democrat politicians push).

Both sides are right, that there is commercial and political interest biasing the media.

But they waste their time and effort blaming each other for the problem.

That is the sad part.

Why can't we unite, keep our affiliations and views intact and respect each other's,
and go after corruption and abuse TOGETHER from BOTH sides LEFT AND RIGHT.

Wouldn't that get rid of all the bogus politics and politicians in the way?
Wouldn't that leave only agreed solutions and the leaders who can work with all people?

Are you SURE we cannot fight this battle together? Isn't the same battle against political abuse of power regardless which side is doing it?

 

[frigidweirdo]

I love it when people try and deny the point of the op. Most of the media is gayloving liberal. Ittakes breitberto uncover weinergate, drudge, leuwinski, but dam tom delay plays golf with someone its a top story, really?

"gayloving"? What does that mean? Because I support HUMAN RIGHTS that means I love gays? No, it doesn't, but it means I respect their choices that don't harm others.

Why don't you?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I wonder if all these sources we keep hearing have sky high ratings like Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, CNS News, the Washington Times, Sean Hannity,. Breitbart, The Daily Caller, Glenn Beck, Alex Jones, and World News Daily are going to whine about this horrible news that the media is liberal.

If the op is right, those (not)news organizations are full of moles.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I have debated this issue with my bf who is in radio media.

What HE means by liberal media is the ownership, counting the owners as contributors to the Democrats and liberals. And FOX News sprang up to combat the liberal media bias exposed most visibly with the Dan Rather incidents, and the "24 hour news cycle" through online media that has opened the door to check this "media bias" called "liberal."

My friends on the REAL left (NOT the commercialized political "liberal/left" hijacked by Gore, Clinton, Obama for corporate support) will call these "corporate conglomerates controlling the media" CONSERVATIVE as THEIR word for capitalistic cronies hijacking govt.

Both sides are complaining about the same monopoly on mainstream media.

But one side compares it to the TRUE LEFT, and blames the monopoly on CONSERVATIVE interests.

The other side compares it to the REAL CONSERVATIVES (not the extreme rightwing that makes for good ratings, nor the RINO's sold out to mainstream politics to stay in office)
and complains the media bias is LIBERAL (based on what the Democrat politicians push).

Both sides are right, that there is commercial and political interest biasing the media.

But they waste their time and effort blaming each other for the problem.

That is the sad part.

Why can't we unite, keep our affiliations and views intact and respect each other's,
and go after corruption and abuse TOGETHER from BOTH sides LEFT AND RIGHT.

Wouldn't that get rid of all the bogus politics and politicians in the way?
Wouldn't that leave only agreed solutions and the leaders who can work with all people?

Are you SURE we cannot fight this battle together? Isn't the same battle against political abuse of power regardless which side is doing it?

[MENTION=22295]emilynghiem[/MENTION]

You and your "bf" really should watch Orwel Rolls In His Grave.

Avail at you Tube, Netflix, etc. And of course, Google it.

 

[emilynghiem]

I love it when people try and deny the point of the op. Most of the media is gayloving liberal. Ittakes breitberto uncover weinergate, drudge, leuwinski, but dam tom delay plays golf with someone its a top story, really?

"gayloving"? What does that mean? Because I support HUMAN RIGHTS that means I love gays? No, it doesn't, but it means I respect their choices that don't harm others.

Why don't you?

Is this bias similar to badmouthing people as
"not wanting people to have access to health care"
just because we defend CIVIL LIBERTIES from unconstitutional mandates?

Do we need to call a TRUCE between parties
* not to assume "gun rights" activists want "more people to die"
* not to assume "prochoice" activists want "unborn babies killed"
* not to assume "marriage equality" means pushing gay rights above other people's
* not to assume "religious liberty" means legalization "unfair discrimination"
* not to assume "mandate opponents" means "denying health care" to others
* not to assume "right to die" means supporting suicide or euthanasia
* not to assume "abolition" means wanting to "coddle criminals"
* not to assume "decriminalization" means wanting to "get high"

Any others to add to the list?

That would be COOL if we could draft a master list of all unfair stereotypes,
signed it as a collective group representing different parties, and issue it to
all major media and political parties NOT to promote these stereotypes but stick to issues.
Wow. that would be cool!!!

 

[Nyvin]

* not to assume "marriage equality" means pushing gay rights above other people's

How in the hell does marriage equality push gay rights above other people's?????

 

[bripat9643]

Is that the same liberal media that was in-bed-with the military, and was cheer leading for the Bush led invasion and occupation of Iraq?

You're delusional. That never happened.

 

[bripat9643]

The vast majority identify as independent, and the number who identify as Democrat are at a historic low, and yet the topic starter concludes the media is liberal.

The ones who identify as "independent" are really communists who don't want to admit it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

And you wonder why we call it the "liberal media" ?

Actually no one ‘wonders.’

Everyone knows for a fact that ‘liberal media’ is a lie contrived by the partisan right for some perceived political gain, likely as red meat for the radical rightwing base.

That ‘the media’ report facts and truth that conflict with subjective conservative dogma doesn’t make them ‘liberal.’

‘Liberal media’ is one among many other conservative myths, such as ‘political correctness,’ ‘entitlement mentality,’ and ‘voter fraud.’

 

[bripat9643]

Finally, faux news explained in one sentence:

Just 7 percent of journalists are Republicans. That?s far fewer than even a decade ago.

Why would ANY intelligent person want to become a journalist?

Why?

They've been bamboozled by a gang of unscrupulous pinko professors

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I love it when people try and deny the point of the op. Most of the media is gayloving liberal. Ittakes breitberto uncover weinergate, drudge, leuwinski, but dam tom delay plays golf with someone its a top story, really?

One can’t ‘deny’ something that doesn’t exist.

And that ‘the media’ don’t share your hatred of gay Americans doesn’t make them ‘liberal.’

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

* not to assume "marriage equality" means pushing gay rights above other people's

How in the hell does marriage equality push gay rights above other people's?????

It doesn’t.

But for some bizarre reason gay Americans realizing their comprehensive civil rights frightens most conservatives, so they dream up these crazy lies.

 

[Plasmaball]

And you wonder why we call it the "liberal media" ?

no we don't...We got it a long time ago. Its not complicated

 

[Plasmaball]

Finally, faux news explained in one sentence:

Just 7 percent of journalists are Republicans. That?s far fewer than even a decade ago.

Why would ANY intelligent person want to become a journalist?

Why?

They've been bamboozled by a gang of unscrupulous pinko professors

dont worry, both of you are too stupid to be a journalist