Monday, October 18, 2004

Half a bias is better than none.

Howard Kurtz, the Washington Post's media watchdog who is less successful at hiding his own bias than almost anyone on the planet, showed his own lack of balance again with this:

"On Fox's "Special Report," the comments made about Kerry over the summer were an eye-opening 5 to 1 negative. In September Kerry fared only slightly better, moving from 17 percent to 21 percent positive. Is that because Fox leans Republican -- or provides a balance to the more pro-Kerry networks?" [emphasis mine]
Notice that Kurtz DOESN'T do something that's very obvious, and which would actually answer his question: he DOESN'T provide stats for those supposedly pro-Kerry networks. You know why? Because providing stats would prove that the networks AREN'T pro-Kerry, and Howard Kurtz knows it.

The difference between Fox and the networks isn't that the networks are left-biased while Fox is right-biased. Right-wingers LOVE to pretend that that's the case, but it isn't. The difference is that Fox's right-wing bias is blatant and the networks' right-wing bias is subtle. That's all.

So, how about it Howard? Let's see some stats for this supposed "liberal media."

Don't hold your breath.

No comments: