Talk:Media bias in the United States
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Media bias in the United States article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 30 days  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
 | This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment edit
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 January 2020 and 5 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Amhumphr. Peer reviewers: Teeverha.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment edit
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 April 2020 and 20 June 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Stacyle5. Peer reviewers: Natali3.Aguil4r.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Archive of prior discussions edit
Poll showing 84% believe mainstream media is threat to democracy in U.S. edit
Should anything from the sources below be included in the article?
https://www.newsnationnow.com/politics/poll-media-threat-democracy
https://twitter.com/AndyGrewal/status/1582580843624550400 Yodabyte (talk) 00:33, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Political Communication edit
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 January 2023 and 17 March 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Croxrys, Elizabeth.stites, Jshpiz, Elizabeth Beyler (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Rileylaub, Annafilippovaa, GuugWiki.
— Assignment last updated by Nikkig1221 (talk) 04:18, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Relevance of new additions edit
Croxrys, I recognize that you are editing this page as part of a course, but I question the wisdom of several of your recent edits (1, 2, and 3). In the second and third edits, you simply restate information that is already present in the paragraph, creating busywork for editors and readers alike. You're also not using sources properly--the first edit has no sources, and the second and third cite sources that, while useful in some contexts, do not actually support the specific claims you are adding: in edit 2, you wrote This type of media served as propaganda for and against the civil rights movement
, but the cited source does not mention "propaganda" one way or another. In edit 3, you wrote Women have also been targeted through media, allowing for misogyny and sexism to take place in media, if even represented
but the cited source [1] makes no mention of women being "targeted" (in addition to being written as an advice column of dubious appropriateness for encyclopedic use) or that this is the source of misogyny. Altogether, these edits give the impression that you're citing sources that are related to the content you are adding, but that you're actually just writing content based on your own interpretations of what you have read on this topic across multiple sources. While this is how many a student paper is written, it isn't an appropriate method for Wikipedia. signed, Rosguill talk 21:42, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Tech company censorship under Liberal subheading edit
I propose updating the following text regarding liberal censorship by tech companies given more recent information coming out from reliable sources about a federal Appeals Court ruling that the Biden admin coerced and threatened social media companies to take down conservative social media content about COVID-19, the 2020 U.S. Presidential election, Hunter Biden's laptop, and other topics, likely amounting to a violation of the First Amendment.
Tech companies and social media sites have been accused of censorship by some conservative groups, although there is little or no evidence to support these claims. The editorial board of the conservative Washington Examiner argued that Facebook and Twitter temporarily limiting the spread of the Hunter Biden laptop controversy on their platforms while fact-checkers reviewed it, even though parts of the story eventually turned out to be accurate, "proves Big Tech's bias".
RS:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/08/politics/biden-administration-social-media-lawsuit/index.html
Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Political Communication edit
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 12 September 2023 and 20 November 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Palmervaldez, Willispanzarello (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Tmorgan106, Jillianr18, Will longley.
— Assignment last updated by Tmorgan106 (talk) 18:44, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Move article to 'Media criticism in the United States'? edit
This seems to be a more precise title that encompasses political bias, conflict of interest, reliability, and other forms of media criticism in the U.S. Superb Owl (talk) 23:34, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Examples removed from 'Media Bias' article edit
These US-specific examples did not have a natural place in the Media bias article, so I'm posting them here in case someone wants to include them in this article. They are somewhat old studies and may not be very useful.
Studies and debates edit
 | This section may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may interest only a particular audience. (March 2021) |
TV edit
A 2007 joint study by the Joan Shorenstein Center on Press, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard University and the Project for Excellence in Journalism found that people see media bias in television news media such as CNN.[1] Although both CNN and Fox were perceived in the study as not being centrist, CNN was perceived as being more liberal than Fox. Moreover, the study's findings concerning CNN's perceived bias are echoed in other studies.[2]
Newspapers edit
Riccardo Puglisi of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology looked at the editorial choices of the New York Times from 1946 to 1997, finding that issues salient to the out-of-power party received more coverage, with slightly more coverage of democratic issues during Republican presidencies than vice versa.[3]
Steve Ansolabehere, Rebecca Lessem and Jim Snyder of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2006) analyzed the political orientation of endorsements by U.S. newspapers resulting in a slight democratic advantage in the 1990s.[4]
A 2004 study by the conservative American Enterprise Institute study found less positive tones of headlines when an incumbent president was Republican.[5]
A 1998 survey by the progressive nonprofit Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting concluded that a majority of Washington-based reporters were relatively liberal on social policies and were significantly to the right of the public on economic, labor, health care and foreign policy issues.[6][needs update] Superb Owl (talk) 18:06, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
References
- ^ "The Invisible Primary – Invisible No Longer: A First Look at Coverage of the 2008 Presidential Campaign" (PDF). Project for Excellence in Journalism. Joan Shorenstein Center on Press, Politics and Public Policy, Harvard University. 29 October 2007. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-26. Retrieved 2010-08-10.
- ^ Weatherly, Jeffrey N.; Petros, Thomas V.; Christopherson, Kimberly M.; Haugen, Erin N. (2007). "Perceptions of Political Bias in the Headlines of Two Major News Organizations". Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics. 12 (2): 91–104. doi:10.1177/1081180X07299804. S2CID 146360070. At p. 97
- ^ Puglisi, Riccardo (2004). "Being the New York Times: The Political Behaviour of a Newspaper". SSRN. doi:10.2139/ssrn.573801. S2CID 56360467. SSRN 573801. Later published as: Puglisi, Riccardo (2011). "Being the New York Times: The Political Behaviour of a Newspaper" (PDF). The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy. 11 (1). doi:10.2202/1935-1682.2025.
- ^ Ansolabehere, Stephen; Lessem, Rebecca; Snyder, James M. (2006). "The Orientation of Newspaper Endorsements in U.S. Elections, 1940–2002". Quarterly Journal of Political Science. 1 (4): 393–404. doi:10.1561/100.00000009. S2CID 153801845.
- ^ Lott, John R.; Hassett, Kevin A. (2004). "Is Newspaper Coverage of Economic Events Politically Biased?". SSRN. doi:10.2139/ssrn.588453. S2CID 219396151. SSRN 588453. Later published as: Lott, John R.; Hassett, Kevin A. (2014). "Is Newspaper Coverage of Economic Events Politically Biased?". Public Choice. 160 (1–2): 65–108. doi:10.1007/s11127-014-0171-5. S2CID 154123163. SSRN 2319001.
- ^ Croteau, David (1998-06-01). "Examining the 'Liberal Media' Claim: Journalists' Views on Politics, Economic Policy and Media Coverage". Extra!. FAIR.