I’d move CNN further left. Where CNN is on the chart seems accurate like 5-10 years ago. But they’re way more left these days. Might be more of an anti-Trump bias than a anti-conservative bias though.
You can nitpick the hell out of something like this. Half of Americans would pile almost all of them into the lower-left corner and put infowars, Fox News, etc at top-middle.
I have no experience with OAN, but I'd have thought it would be in that red box in the lower-right corner. I generally think it's pretty close...I'd move Mother Jones left (but not down).
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin 2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
CNN and MSNBC should be closer to where Fox is on the liberal side. They are all only around to provide confirmation bias for their viewers at this point. Other than that the only glaring mistake I see is that InfoWars should be right above AP & Reuters...
Post edited by FiveBelow on
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,646
Sorry the link doesn't work. Not sure why.
Alex Jones ) responded with his own chart saying “dying dinosaur media’s extreme liberal bias” and that it unfairly “demonizes” independent media" (sure, Alex, whatever you say) :
"Don't give in to the lies. Don't give in to the fear. Hold on to the truth. And to hope."
-Jim Acosta
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,646
CNN and MSNBC should be closer to where Fox is on the liberal side. They are all only around to provide confirmation bias for their viewers at this point. Other than that the only glaring mistake I see is that InfoWars should be right above AP & Reuters...
Wait, you see InfoWars as neutral, unbiased, and fact reporting?
"Don't give in to the lies. Don't give in to the fear. Hold on to the truth. And to hope."
CNN and MSNBC should be closer to where Fox is on the liberal side. They are all only around to provide confirmation bias for their viewers at this point. Other than that the only glaring mistake I see is that InfoWars should be right above AP & Reuters...
Wait, you see InfoWars as neutral, unbiased, and fact reporting?
CNN and MSNBC should be closer to where Fox is on the liberal side. They are all only around to provide confirmation bias for their viewers at this point. Other than that the only glaring mistake I see is that InfoWars should be right above AP & Reuters...
Assuming the CNN/MSNBC part is not sarcasm (since you said InfoWars was)...I would move MSNBC further left, perhaps. But not further down. They might be as biased as Fox but not nearly as dishonest.
I am OK with where CNN is...I'd still put 'em in the middle, but I don't tune in a ton.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin 2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,646
CNN and MSNBC should be closer to where Fox is on the liberal side. They are all only around to provide confirmation bias for their viewers at this point. Other than that the only glaring mistake I see is that InfoWars should be right above AP & Reuters...
Wait, you see InfoWars as neutral, unbiased, and fact reporting?
Haha no, total sarcasm on my part.
Of course! Sorry, I should have known!
More coffee, please!
"Don't give in to the lies. Don't give in to the fear. Hold on to the truth. And to hope."
I think the chart is pretty close. Of course things can be nitpicked, but it gives a good overview and puts them generally in the right categories. I've read or been exposed to most of those sources at various times, and think it is a fair assessment.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,646
I think the chart is pretty close. Of course things can be nitpicked, but it gives a good overview and puts them generally in the right categories. I've read or been exposed to most of those sources at various times, and think it is a fair assessment.
I also think its pretty close. Not sure I would put MSNBC to close to "hyper-partisan liberal" but then I don't read that source all that often.
"Don't give in to the lies. Don't give in to the fear. Hold on to the truth. And to hope."
CNN and MSNBC should be closer to where Fox is on the liberal side. They are all only around to provide confirmation bias for their viewers at this point. Other than that the only glaring mistake I see is that InfoWars should be right above AP & Reuters...
Assuming the CNN/MSNBC part is not sarcasm (since you said InfoWars was)...I would move MSNBC further left, perhaps. But not further down. They might be as biased as Fox but not nearly as dishonest.
I am OK with where CNN is...I'd still put 'em in the middle, but I don't tune in a ton.
I don't think any of them are really in the business of reporting unbiased news, they just want viewers and they know how to get them. You have to remember, it's all about the $$$. Anderson Cooper net worth $200 million and Sean Hannity net worth $250 million...please. Most people do not check the facts anyway, they just believe the first thing they are told from the source that makes them feel warm and fuzzy.
I think it is overall pretty spot on. The sources I most rely for accurate and complex analysis fall exactly where they should based on what I've read. I recently started reading The Economist more and really like their global coverage and analysis of current events. On the otherside, I enjoy The Atlantic as well. They can both immerse me in about a 10 - 15 minute read on a topic. I see the lean from The Hill and Politico and read each to get perspective from both sides. I really don't read or follow anything below the yellow rectangle. I only view CNN as a basic news source (i.e. general overview based on the writer/reporters view and the information at hand). It would be like if I still tuned in to my local channels world news tonight. I am not much in to opinion pieces unless it is a subject matter expert discussing a current dilemma, but even those sometimes get too partisan.
CNN and MSNBC should be closer to where Fox is on the liberal side. They are all only around to provide confirmation bias for their viewers at this point. Other than that the only glaring mistake I see is that InfoWars should be right above AP & Reuters...
Assuming the CNN/MSNBC part is not sarcasm (since you said InfoWars was)...I would move MSNBC further left, perhaps. But not further down. They might be as biased as Fox but not nearly as dishonest.
I am OK with where CNN is...I'd still put 'em in the middle, but I don't tune in a ton.
I don't think any of them are really in the business of reporting unbiased news, they just want viewers and they know how to get them. You have to remember, it's all about the $$$. Anderson Cooper net worth $200 million and Sean Hannity net worth $250 million...please. Most people do not check the facts anyway, they just believe the first thing they are told from the source that makes them feel warm and fuzzy.
I disagree with the bolded quite a bit. There are definitely many brands on that chart who do exactly what you suggest, but I think the closer you get to the top middle, the lower the percentage of their coverage that applies to your statement. Of course they don't want to go broke, but I think many still have a strong regard for fair and accurate reporting. Your two examples just happen to be the most reference extremes of each "side". Can any of us really name any other big name "news" personality from those other sources (I don't mean Alex Jones either)?
CNN and MSNBC should be closer to where Fox is on the liberal side. They are all only around to provide confirmation bias for their viewers at this point. Other than that the only glaring mistake I see is that InfoWars should be right above AP & Reuters...
Assuming the CNN/MSNBC part is not sarcasm (since you said InfoWars was)...I would move MSNBC further left, perhaps. But not further down. They might be as biased as Fox but not nearly as dishonest.
I am OK with where CNN is...I'd still put 'em in the middle, but I don't tune in a ton.
I don't think any of them are really in the business of reporting unbiased news, they just want viewers and they know how to get them. You have to remember, it's all about the $$$. Anderson Cooper net worth $200 million and Sean Hannity net worth $250 million...please. Most people do not check the facts anyway, they just believe the first thing they are told from the source that makes them feel warm and fuzzy.
I disagree with the bolded quite a bit. There are definitely many brands on that chart who do exactly what you suggest, but I think the closer you get to the top middle, the lower the percentage of their coverage that applies to your statement. Of course they don't want to go broke, but I think many still have a strong regard for fair and accurate reporting. Your two examples just happen to be the most reference extremes of each "side". Can any of us really name any other big name "news" personality from those other sources (I don't mean Alex Jones either)?
The curve pretty much reflects the market. There are those that want to have their beliefs confirmed and are almost willing to be lied to (or at least have a blind spot to the lying). There are those that essentially want facts but want to hear someone from their POV discuss those facts and say what it means for "their side." And there are those that want "just the facts." I'm sure that market share has fallen as the news cycle has become 24/7 through the internet and so many TV channels. But there is a market for it and while it's impossible to always be unbiased, there are some that do a decent job.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin 2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
CNN and MSNBC should be closer to where Fox is on the liberal side. They are all only around to provide confirmation bias for their viewers at this point. Other than that the only glaring mistake I see is that InfoWars should be right above AP & Reuters...
Assuming the CNN/MSNBC part is not sarcasm (since you said InfoWars was)...I would move MSNBC further left, perhaps. But not further down. They might be as biased as Fox but not nearly as dishonest.
I am OK with where CNN is...I'd still put 'em in the middle, but I don't tune in a ton.
I don't think any of them are really in the business of reporting unbiased news, they just want viewers and they know how to get them. You have to remember, it's all about the $$$. Anderson Cooper net worth $200 million and Sean Hannity net worth $250 million...please. Most people do not check the facts anyway, they just believe the first thing they are told from the source that makes them feel warm and fuzzy.
I disagree with the bolded quite a bit. There are definitely many brands on that chart who do exactly what you suggest, but I think the closer you get to the top middle, the lower the percentage of their coverage that applies to your statement. Of course they don't want to go broke, but I think many still have a strong regard for fair and accurate reporting. Your two examples just happen to be the most reference extremes of each "side". Can any of us really name any other big name "news" personality from those other sources (I don't mean Alex Jones either)?
My statement was not intended for all of the listed sources, just the 3 main cable news options who over the years have taken much more noticeable stances in order to maintain their base.
I think the chart is pretty close. Of course things can be nitpicked, but it gives a good overview and puts them generally in the right categories. I've read or been exposed to most of those sources at various times, and think it is a fair assessment.
I also think its pretty close. Not sure I would put MSNBC to close to "hyper-partisan liberal" but then I don't read that source all that often.
I don't agree with that at all.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,646
I think the chart is pretty close. Of course things can be nitpicked, but it gives a good overview and puts them generally in the right categories. I've read or been exposed to most of those sources at various times, and think it is a fair assessment.
I also think its pretty close. Not sure I would put MSNBC to close to "hyper-partisan liberal" but then I don't read that source all that often.
I don't agree with that at all.
You don't think "hyper-partisan liberal" is exaggerated? Maybe it's the "hyper" part that seems a bit overboard. Like I said, I don't go there much. In what way are they "hyper-partisan"?
"Don't give in to the lies. Don't give in to the fear. Hold on to the truth. And to hope."
CNN and MSNBC should be closer to where Fox is on the liberal side. They are all only around to provide confirmation bias for their viewers at this point. Other than that the only glaring mistake I see is that InfoWars should be right above AP & Reuters...
I don't see CNN as the counter to Fox. CNN invites a conservative point of view to their discussions.
CNN and MSNBC should be closer to where Fox is on the liberal side. They are all only around to provide confirmation bias for their viewers at this point. Other than that the only glaring mistake I see is that InfoWars should be right above AP & Reuters...
I don't see CNN as the counter to Fox. CNN invites a conservative point of view to their discussions.
Tell that to that race baiting hack Don Lemon.....
CNN and MSNBC should be closer to where Fox is on the liberal side. They are all only around to provide confirmation bias for their viewers at this point. Other than that the only glaring mistake I see is that InfoWars should be right above AP & Reuters...
I don't see CNN as the counter to Fox. CNN invites a conservative point of view to their discussions.
Tell that to that race baiting hack Don Lemon.....
Tell him what exactly? That CNN brings on conservative guests to share their viewpoint?
CNN and MSNBC should be closer to where Fox is on the liberal side. They are all only around to provide confirmation bias for their viewers at this point. Other than that the only glaring mistake I see is that InfoWars should be right above AP & Reuters...
I don't see CNN as the counter to Fox. CNN invites a conservative point of view to their discussions.
To be fair, Fox News also brings on liberal guests. I think they are pretty comparable in terms of bias. I tune into both on a weekly basis, in equal doses, so I'm not beholden to either. I do think that CNN is to the left what Fox News is to the right, or somewhere close to it.
CNN and MSNBC should be closer to where Fox is on the liberal side. They are all only around to provide confirmation bias for their viewers at this point. Other than that the only glaring mistake I see is that InfoWars should be right above AP & Reuters...
I don't see CNN as the counter to Fox. CNN invites a conservative point of view to their discussions.
Tell that to that race baiting hack Don Lemon.....
CNN and MSNBC should be closer to where Fox is on the liberal side. They are all only around to provide confirmation bias for their viewers at this point. Other than that the only glaring mistake I see is that InfoWars should be right above AP & Reuters...
I don't see CNN as the counter to Fox. CNN invites a conservative point of view to their discussions.
To be fair, Fox News also brings on liberal guests. I think they are pretty comparable in terms of bias. I tune into both on a weekly basis, in equal doses, so I'm not beholden to either. I do think that CNN is to the left what Fox News is to the right, or somewhere close to it.
I haven't watched cable news in a few years, but I would be surprised to learn there was any legitimate CNN or MSNBC equivalent to the way Fox News covered COVID in February and March.
CNN and MSNBC should be closer to where Fox is on the liberal side. They are all only around to provide confirmation bias for their viewers at this point. Other than that the only glaring mistake I see is that InfoWars should be right above AP & Reuters...
I don't see CNN as the counter to Fox. CNN invites a conservative point of view to their discussions.
To be fair, Fox News also brings on liberal guests. I think they are pretty comparable in terms of bias. I tune into both on a weekly basis, in equal doses, so I'm not beholden to either. I do think that CNN is to the left what Fox News is to the right, or somewhere close to it.
Even in primetime?
Most of my Fox News exposure is Tucker Carlson, who I find to be more fair than Hannity. Carlson does invite liberal guests on; yes.
Comments
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
Wait, you see InfoWars as neutral, unbiased, and fact reporting?
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
I also think its pretty close. Not sure I would put MSNBC to close to "hyper-partisan liberal" but then I don't read that source all that often.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
You don't think "hyper-partisan liberal" is exaggerated? Maybe it's the "hyper" part that seems a bit overboard. Like I said, I don't go there much. In what way are they "hyper-partisan"?
LOL. probably not. But the real question is, where's The Onion!?!
"pull the race card"
"all lives matter"
Helpful phrases for determining who just might be a good old fashioned racist.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
"...I changed by not changing at all..."