Do you agree with this chart?

brianlux
brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,663
in A Moving Train
Saw  this this morning and thought it was interesting.  Thoughts?




"It's a sad and beautiful world"
-Roberto Benigni

«13

Comments

  • Ledbetterman10
    Ledbetterman10 Posts: 16,994
    edited May 2020
    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. 
    2000: Camden 1, 2003: Philly, State College, Camden 1, MSG 2, Hershey, 2004: Reading, 2005: Philly, 2006: Camden 1, 2, East Rutherford 1, 2007: Lollapalooza, 2008: Camden 1, Washington D.C., MSG 1, 2, 2009: Philly 1, 2, 3, 4, 2010: Bristol, MSG 2, 2011: PJ20 1, 2, 2012: Made In America, 2013: Brooklyn 2, Philly 2, 2014: Denver, 2015: Global Citizen Festival, 2016: Philly 2, Fenway 1, 2018: Fenway 1, 2, 2021: Sea. Hear. Now. 2022: Camden, 2024: Philly 2, 2025: Pittsburgh 1

    Pearl Jam bootlegs:
    http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
  • OnWis97
    OnWis97 St. Paul, MN Posts: 5,610
    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
  • FiveBelow
    FiveBelow Posts: 1,336
    edited May 2020
    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
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,663

    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) :


    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,663
    JW269453 said:
    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?
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • FiveBelow
    FiveBelow Posts: 1,336
    brianlux said:
    JW269453 said:
    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.

  • OnWis97
    OnWis97 St. Paul, MN Posts: 5,610
    JW269453 said:
    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
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,663
    JW269453 said:
    brianlux said:
    JW269453 said:
    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!  :smile:
    More coffee, please!  :lol:

    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • jeffbr
    jeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    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
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,663
    jeffbr said:
    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.
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • FiveBelow
    FiveBelow Posts: 1,336
    OnWis97 said:
    JW269453 said:
    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.
  • tbergs
    tbergs Posts: 10,410
    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.
    It's a hopeless situation...
  • tbergs
    tbergs Posts: 10,410
    edited May 2020
    JW269453 said:
    OnWis97 said:
    JW269453 said:
    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)?
    It's a hopeless situation...
  • OnWis97
    OnWis97 St. Paul, MN Posts: 5,610
    tbergs said:
    JW269453 said:
    OnWis97 said:
    JW269453 said:
    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
  • FiveBelow
    FiveBelow Posts: 1,336
    tbergs said:
    JW269453 said:
    OnWis97 said:
    JW269453 said:
    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.
  • Gern Blansten
    Gern Blansten Mar-A-Lago Posts: 22,189
    brianlux said:
    jeffbr said:
    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
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,663
    Gern Blansten said:
    brianlux said:
    jeffbr said:
    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"?
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • mace1229
    mace1229 Posts: 9,829
    Should National Enquirer even be on this chart? I guess random tabloid articles are neither right or left...
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,663
    mace1229 said:
    Should National Enquirer even be on this chart? I guess random tabloid articles are neither right or left...

    LOL. probably not.  But the real question is, where's The Onion!?!
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • eddiec
    eddiec Posts: 3,959
    JW269453 said:
    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.

Categories