Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Liberal bias

2010-01-11T14:40:00Z

CharlesGebler: /*See Also*/

'''Liberal bias''' is partisan selection of information to support [[liberal]] policies. This selection bias can be expressed by reporters and other journalists in mainstream media, while usually presenting themselves as objective reporting mediums. It includes techniques such as [[placement bias]], [[photo bias]] and [[liberal style]]. There is a difference between being liberal, having a liberal perspective, and having a liberal bias.

The essence of liberal bias is to dismiss or even to censor all opposing views. For liberals, to allow the airing or publishing of an opposing view creates the risk that people might discover errors in the liberal viewpoint. On the other hand, Conservatives typically uphold freedom of ideological expression, with many expressing that although they may oppose a liberal view with every fiber of their being, they will defend to the death their right to say it, because they believe that in the [[marketplace of ideas]] the true will always win over the false. (At Conservapedia we are not afraid to mention and even to summarize anti-conservative arguments.)

==Conservative Opposition to Liberal Bias==
[[Ann Coulter]] wrote:
*To obscure the overwhelming liberal dominance of the media, the few designated media "[[conservatives]]" are cited tirelessly in testimonies to the [[ideological]] diversity in the nation's [[newsroom]]s. Democrats in the media are [[editors]], national [[correspondent]]s, [[news anchor]]s, and [[reporter]]s. Republicans in the media are "from the right" [[polemic]]ists grudgingly tolerated within the liberal behemoth. Republican views must be accompanied by a conspicuous warning: "[[Partisan]] Conservative Opinion Coming!" [[Neutral]] news slots are reserved for Democrats exclusively. "Balance" is created by having a liberal host a debate between a liberal and a moderate Republican. <ref>''[[Slander (book)|]]'', P. 60</ref>

In June 2009, [[Republican]]s in the House of Representatives have created the Media Caucus to fight the Democrat-aligned media propaganda.

==Left-wing defense of Liberal Bias==

The managing editor of ''[[Time (magazine)|Time]]'' Magazine dismissed the need for [[objectivity]] altogether, saying:

:I have felt that we have to actually say, ‘We have a point of view about something and we feel strongly about it, we just have to be assertive about it and say it positively.'"<ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jeff-poor/2008/04/22/time-editor-objective-journalism-fantasy-justifies-greening-iwo-jima-phot Time Editor: Objective Journalism a 'Fantasy']</ref>

A ''Boston Globe'' editor, Peter Accardi, adamantly proclaimed that he would not publish reader's replies in the Globe's Letters to the Editor critical of homosexuality, erroneously equating such with racism:

:"I won't run any letter that promotes bigotry against any group. You'd be surprised how many anti-Semitic letters we get, but not one will see the light of day on a letters page I handle. Same with anti-black, anti-Italian, etc."<ref>http://www.cultureandfamily.org/articledisplay.asp?id=4324&department=CFI&categoryid=cfreport</ref>

Note the convoluted logic which assumes that any criticism of the behavior of members of a group must be due to "bigotry", which is itself a bigoted attack on the critics designed to prevent any consideration of the principles or facts supporting their arguments.

==Left-wing denial of Liberal bias==

[[New York Times]] publisher [[Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr.]] has denied that the New York Times has a liberal viewpoint and has stated the New York Times has an "urban" viewpoint.<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/weekinreview/25bott.html?ei=5088&en=452926dcb11511a3&ex=1248667200&pagewanted=all&position=</ref> However, in the summer of 2004, the newspaper's then public editor (ombudsman), Daniel Okrent, published a piece on the Times' liberal bias and cited the example of their coverage of [[Homosexuality and Marriage|homosexual marriage]].<ref>http://www.cnsnews.com/facts/2007/facts2007914.asp</ref><ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/weekinreview/25bott.html?ei=5088&en=452926dcb11511a3&ex=1248667200&pagewanted=all&position=</ref> Although the New York Times has a particularly heavy bias when it comes to the [[homosexuality]] issue, the New York Times is not unusual in regards to the media having a liberal bias when it comes to the subject of homosexuality; see [[Homosexuality in the Media]]. [[John Stossel]] is an author, consumer reporter, and a co-anchor for the [[ABC News]] show [[20/20]]. [[Cybercast News Service]] states the following regarding regarding the influence of the New York Times and [[Washington Post]]:
{{cquote|While the newspapers reach only a fraction of people compared to the television networks, he said radio and television producers rely heavily on their contents.

"The reason the Times, and to a lesser extent the Post, are so important, and they are, is because the TV and radio - all of the media - copy it sycophantically," he [John Stossel] said. "That's how bias at the Times becomes bias in other media."<ref>http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200401/CUL20040128a.html</ref>}}

[[Image:Liberal Bias.png|none|500px]]
'''The following persons, organizations, television programs or media outlets have well known liberal bias:'''

* ''[[The New York Times]]'' <ref>Reporters and editors today are overwhelmingly liberal politically, as studies of the attitudes of key members of the press have repeatedly shown. Should you doubt these findings, recall the statement of Daniel Okrent, then the public editor at the New York Times. Under the headline, "Is the New York times a Liberal Newspaper?," Mr. Okrent's first sentence was, "Of course it is." [http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110009203] </ref>
* [[ABC]], [[CBS]] <ref>Townhall.com, [http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MarvinOlasky/2001/12/04/enabling_media_bias Enabling media bias], Marvin Olasky, December 4, 2001.</ref>
* [[Dan Rather]] <ref>During a phone conversation, [[Bernard Goldberg]] asked him, "What do you consider the ''New York Times''? Rather answered, "Middle of the road." (''[[Bias (book)|Bias]]'', page 221)</ref>
* [[NBC]] News
* [[LA Times]]
* [[Michael Moore]]
* [[The Daily Show]]
* [[Real Time]] with [[Bill Maher]]
* [[Washington Post]]
* [[MSNBC]]
* [[BBC]]
* [[Guardian (uk)]] ([[UK]] news organization)
* [[Associated Press]]

==Media==

===LA Times===

The mainstream media including the LA Times had been guilty of being silent regarding the [[John Edwards]] affair that the National Enquirer had broke in October 2007. The Enquirer followed up with a publication in December of 2007. Then in July 2008, the Enquirer had confronted Edwards at the Beverly Hilton hotel after he spent the entire day with his mistress. After Edwards admitted the affair on Friday August 8th, the mainsteam media finally reported the [[scandal]], including the [[LA Times]]. In an article titled "Mainstream media finally pounce on Edwards' affair", the LA Times declared that they had been pursuing the story prior to Friday. <ref>[http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/tv/la-na-edwardsmedia9-2008aug09,0,7463269.story Mainstream media finally pounce on Edwards' affair] LA Times, August 9, 2008</ref> But they gave no excuse for hiding this from the American public. They have showed their true liberal bias by not reporting the story earlier. Then making an attempt to further fool the public by saying they were pursuing the story, when in fact 10 months had lapsed. Plus, nowhere in the article does it mention the Edwards is a Democrat. To the credit of the LA Times, they do mention that Democratic party strategists say Edwards needs to address the story, at the very bottom of the article. Protection of fellow [[liberal]] [[Democrats]] by the LA Times is more important than being a honest news organization.

===CBS News===
[[Image:Bio-pic.jpg|right|thumb|180px|[[Bernard Goldberg]]]]
CBS insider [[Bernard Goldberg]] wrote the definitive book on liberal bias in the media, simply entitled ''[[Bias (book)|Bias]]''.
*He asserts that an ''"inability to see liberal views as liberal views ... is at the heart of the entire problem."''
*He wrote: "[[Pauline Kael]], for years the brilliant film critic at the ''New Yorker'', was completely baffled about how [[Richard Nixon]] could have beaten [[George McGovern]] in 1972: 'Nobody I know voted for Nixon.' Never mind that Nixon carried 49 states. She wasn't kidding." <ref>(''Bias (book)'', page 222-223)</ref>

Goldberg also suggested liberals don't even see their liberal values as "liberal":
*"Their views on all the big social issues ... aren't liberal views at all. They're simply reasonable views, shared by all the reasonable people the media elites mingle with ..." <ref>(''Bias (book)'', page 222)</ref>

During the [[Vietnam War]], the [[Soviet Union]] was the principal ally of [[Communist ]] North Vietnam, providing weapons and training in what was a major conflict of the [[Cold War]] that took 58,000 American lives. ''CBS Evening News with [[Walter Cronkite]]'' regularly carried news reports from its [[Moscow]] Bureau Chief, [[Bernard Redmont]]. When peace negotiations commenced with North Vietnam in Paris, Redmont became ''CBS News'' [[Paris]] Bureau Chief. What Redmont never reported during the ten year conflict was, Redmont had been a [[KGB]] operative since the 1930s, and member of the notorious [[Silvermaster group]]. <ref>[http://hnn.us/articles/11581.html KGB file 43173 vol. 2 (v) pp. 46-55], Alexander Vassiliev, Notes on A. Gorsky’s Report to Savchenko S.R., 23 December 1949. Original document from KGB Archives [http://www.johnearlhaynes.org/page46.html].</ref> Redmont was the only journalist to whom his fellow [[Comintern]] party member, and North Vietnamese chief negotiator, Mai Van Bo, granted an interview to bring the Communist point of view into American living rooms in what has been called, "the living room war."

The selective and editorial reporting of the Vietnam war is often cited as a manifest example of liberal bias in the mainstream media, with Hanoi reportedly affirming that it could not have won "without the Western press."<ref>Uwe Siemon-Netto in the International Herald Tribune, reprinted in Encounter, October 1979</ref>

===New York Times===
[[Image:Arthursulzbergerjr.jpg|right|thumbnail|150px|[[New York Times]] publisher [[Arthur Sulzberger Jr.]]]]
Peter D. Feaver of the ''[[Boston Globe]]'' noted on the sixth anniversary of the [[September 11, 2001 attacks|September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks]] that [[MoveOn.org]] ran a full-page advertisement in the ''[[New York Times]]'' accusing General [[David Petraeus]] of activities befitting a traitor. The advertisement alleges, without [[evidence]], that Petraeus would not give an honest, professional assessment of [[Operation Iraqi Freedom]]. Feaver noted, "The MoveOn.org ad is vicious ... a deliberate attack on the senior Army commander, in a major daily newspaper, with the intention of destroying as much of his [[credibility]] as possible...part of an elaborate effort to undermine public support for the [[Iraq war]], and was foreshadowed by an unnamed [[Democratic]] senator who told a reporter, "No one wants to call [Petraeus] a liar on national TV . . . The expectation is that the outside groups will do this for us." The effort is funded by powerful [[special interest]]s, and has all the trappings of a major political campaign.<ref>[http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/09/11/moveons_mccarthy_moment/ MoveOn's McCarthy moment], By Peter D. Feaver, ''Boston Globe'', September 11, 2007.</ref> Within a day it was discovered the ''New York Times'' gave MoveOn.org a “hefty discount” for its ad questioning Petraeus’ integrity. According to the director of public relations for the ''New York Times'', “the open rate for an ad of that size and type is $181,692.” A spokesman for MoveOn.org confirmed that the [[liberal activist group]] paid only $65,000 for the ad - a reduction of more than $116,000 from the stated rate.<ref>[http://www.nypost.com/seven/09132007/news/nationalnews/times_gives_lefties_a_hefty_di.htm Time Gives Lefties a Hefty Discount for "Betray us" Ad], Charles Hurt, ''New York Post'', September 13, 2007.</ref>
In July, 2008, the [[New York Times]] rejected an opinion piece written by [[John McCain]], which was responding to earlier piece written by [[Barack Obama]].<ref>http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/07/21/mccain-campaign-says-new-york-times-blocked-op-ed-response-to-obama/</ref> This came after the [[New York Times]] had previously published at least seven op-ed pieces by [[McCain]] since 1996, and endorsed him in the 2008 Republican Presidential primaries. The reason the [[New York Times]] cited for the July 2008 rejection was that they were asking the McCain campaign to provide a more substantive piece which would contrast his positions with the details of the Obama piece on a point-by-point basis.<ref>http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/21/the-times-and-the-mccain-op-ed/</ref>

===Newsweek===

Perhaps the most liberal weekly news magazine, [[Newsweek]], is seen going out of its way to impugn evangelical Christianity. As far back as April 8, 1996, a Newsweek article promoted skepticism concerning the resurrection of Christ, presenting various theories countering the Biblical record,<ref>Rethinking The Resurrection, by Kenneth L. Woodward, Apr 8, 1996</ref> and the transformational results of faith in such,[http://www.cbn.com/700club/features/amazing] while failing to provide scholarly evangelical responses which refute their theories.<ref>[http://www.tektonics.org/TK-J.html See under Jesus-Resurrection]</ref><ref>[http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/_PDFArchives/theological-dictionary/TD1W0401.pdf Alternate Theories of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ— Part Two]</ref><ref>[http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/bodily.html The Bodily Resurrection of Jesus Dr. William Lane Craig]</ref>

Insidious attempts to marginalize evangelical Christianity continue to be replicated, most recently with the article by editor Jon Meacham (who recently compared President Obama to being like God) writing "The End of Christian America" (Apr 4, 2009), in which he opined that it was "a good thing" that America was "less influenced by movements and arguments of an explicitly Christian character than they were even five years ago."

In addition, on Nov. 13, 2006 Newsweek featured an article by [[atheist]] Sam Harris, who sees Christianity as "incompatible with genuine morality",<ref>A Case Against Faith, Newsweek, Nov. 13, 2006</ref> based upon his own objectively baseless and mutable moral authority.<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Atheism1.html Atheism versus Christ]</ref>

As noted by Don Feder<ref>[http://www.donfeder.com/articles/0611GodComplex.pdf In culture war, Newsweek tells evangelicals – bring the troops home, November 27, 2006]</ref> in response to a Newsweek article titled, “America’s God Complex – Like George W. Bush, The Religious Right Is At The Crossroads”<ref>November 13, 2006</ref> Newsweek advocates a faith that does not take moral stands or become involved in changing moral policy.

Consistent with this ethos, Newsweek proactively attacked historical Biblical morality in regards to [[homosexuality and biblical interpretation]],<ref>“Our Mutual Joy, Dec 15, 2008 by religion editor Lisa Miller</ref> which attempts have resulted in extensive refutation by evangelical scholars and writers.<ref>[http://www.robgagnon.net/NewsweekMillerHomosexResp.htm More than “Mutual Joy”: Lisa Miller of Newsweek against Scripture and Jesus]</ref><ref>[http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html Homosexual relations and the Bible]</ref><ref>[http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=2881 Turning the Bible on its Head -- Newsweek Goes for Gay Marriage]</ref>

=== [[PBS]] ===
The taxpayer-funded Public Broadcasting System has become a left-leaning channel for the liberal viewpoint. This despite the 1985 rule that all PBS shows must be "noncommercial, nonpartisan and nonsectarian." Their tax-subsidized programming includes celebrating [[lesbian]]-feminist choirs, “transgender” riots, and a liberal teenager fighting against [[abstinence]] education. As part of its wave of secular fundamentalism, PBS celebrates even late-term abortionists with a fanaticism. The PBS show NOW was devoted to smearing the pro-life movement as terrorists <ref>[http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/524/index.html Abortion Providers Under Siege] PBS, June 12, 2009</ref> In a fake display of following the rules, 300-plus PBS stations have been instructed to avoid any kind of religious programming.

=== AP ===
Of all unanswered questions needing journalist investigation; where the stimulus money went, Pelosi's health care takeover costs, Hasan's terror associations-- the Associated Press assigned 11 people to fact check all 432 pages of Sarah Palin's new book ''Going Rogue''. The core of good journalism is holding public figures accountable. Yet, the AP did no such fact checking of Joe Biden's book or Braack Obama's or the late Sen. Ted Kennedy nor Hillary or [[Bill Clinton]]'s autobiography. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/17/ap-turns-heads-devoting-reporters-palin-book-fact-check/ AP Turns Heads for Devoting 11 Reporters to Palin Book 'Fact Check', FoxNews, November 17, 2009]</ref>

=== Media Bias===

A 2005 report<ref>[http://www.polisci.ucla.edu/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.pdf A MEASURE OF MEDIA BIAS] </ref> by Tim Groseclose and Jeffrey Milyo political scientists at UCLA concluded that, based on estimated ideological scores, all of the news
outlets they examined, except Fox News’ Special Report and the Washington Times, showed a strong liberal bias (scores to the left of the average member of Congress). Of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center, with CBS' "Evening News," The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times ranking second, third and fourth most liberal behind the news pages of The Wall Street Journal. Only Fox News' "Special Report With Brit Hume" and The Washington Times scored right of the average U.S. voter.
<blockquote>
"I suspected that many media outlets would tilt to the left because surveys have shown that reporters tend to vote more Democrat than Republican," said Tim Groseclose, a UCLA political scientist and the study's lead author. "But I was surprised at just how pronounced the distinctions are." <ref>http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=6664</ref>
</blockquote>

ABC, CBS, and NBC together have unloaded more than a thousand stories on Obama’s presidential campaign but not a single story devoted to examining Obama’s abysmal abortion record. <ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-bozell/2008/10/14/bozell-column-whos-fierce-abortion Bozell Column: Who's 'Fierce' on Abortion?] NewsBusters.org, October 14, 2008</ref>

===Vision of the anointed===
[[Image:Thomassowell.jpg‎|thumbnail|150px|right|[[Thomas Sowell]]]]
Economist [[Thomas Sowell]] in his book published in 1996, ''The Vision of the Anointed'', discusses the anointed vision of liberals and liberalism to promote their agenda.

Desperate evasions of discordant evidence, and the denigration and even demonizing of those presenting such evidence, are indicative of the high stakes in contemporary [[culture war]]s, which are not about alternative policies but [[Values clarification|alternative worlds]] and of alternative roles of liberals in these worlds. Opponents must be shown to be not merely mistaken but morally lacking, in Sowell's view. This approach replaces the intellectual discussion of arguments by the moral extermination of persons. This denigration or [[demonizing]] of those opposed to their views not only has the desired effect of discrediting the opposition but also has the unintended effect of cutting off the path of retreat from positions which become progressively less tenable with the passage of time and the accumulation of discordant evidence. The very thought that those dismissed as simplistic or maligned might have been right–even if only on a single issue–is at best galling and potentially devastating. Their last refuge in this situation are their good intentions.<ref>Thomas Sowell, [http://www.li.suu.edu/library/circulation/Lewis/ba2350tlVisionoftheAnointedShortVersion.pdf ''The Vision of the Anointed''], New York: Basic Books, 1996.</ref>

==Presidential coverage==

Many conservative and a few liberal commentators have remarked on the seeming extraordinary favor shown toward Barack Obama during his candidacy, and presidency.<ref>Dan Gainor, ''ONE YEAR LATER: Journalists' Love for Obama Still Going Strong'', FOXNews.com November 06, 2009</ref> A 2008 comprehensive analysis conducted by the Media Research Center[http://www.mrc.org/SpecialReports/2008/obama/obama.asp] of every evening news report by the NBC, ABC and CBS television networks, showed that positive stories about Obama since he came to national prominence outnumbered negative stories 7 to 1.<ref>[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=72914 Study: ABC, NBC, CBS strongly support Obama August 20, 2008]</ref> During the Presidents candidacy, MSNBC Hardball host Chris Matthews stated, "Yeah, well, you know what? I want to do everything I can to make this thing work, this new presidency work,..."

In November 2008, Mark Halperin of Time and ABC News criticized the media coverage of the 2008 presidential race, stating, "It's the most disgusting failure of people in our business since the Iraq war." "It was extreme bias, extreme pro-Obama coverage."<ref>[http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/11/halperin-decrie.html Political Punch, November 24, 2008 8:06 AM]</ref>

Newsweek editor Evan Thomas is seen by some to confirm the lack of objectivity and tendency to give undue exaltation they see the main stream media often displaying toward the new leader of the United states. Referring to his perception of the President after his recent speeches overseas, Thomas stated,

"I mean, in a way Obama's standing above the country, above the world. He's sort of God."[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37B_nOdRTAA]<ref>june 5, 2009, MSNBC interview with Chris Matthews</ref>

==Statistical data==

In 2008, John Perazzo, writing in FrontPageMagazine.com, presented major research findings <ref>[http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=32928 In the Tank: A Statistical Analysis of Media Bias By John Perazzo FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, October 31, 2008]</ref><ref>[http://www.mrc.org/biasbasics/pdf/BiasBasics.pdf Mostly from Media Research Center, The Liberal Media Exposed]</ref> regarding the underlying beliefs of news media professionals.

* Between 90 and 97 percent of news media professionals have consistently affirmed themselves to be pro-choice on the matter of abortion, with more than half of the respondents agreeing that abortion should be legal under any and all circumstances.<ref>Robert Lichter and Stanley Rothman’s 1981 survey of 240 journalists at top media outlets; Los Angeles Times 1985 survey of 2,700 journalists at 621 American newspapers; Robert Lichter and Stanley Rothman’s 1986 study of the media’s attitudes and their influence on society, as published in the National Federation for Decency’s Journal; Indiana University journalism professors David Weaver and G. Cleveland Wilhoit’s 1992 survey of 1,410 newspaper, magazine, television, and radio journalists; Stanley Rothman and Amy Black’s 1995 study of the media elite.</ref>
* Between 6 and 8 percent attended religious services regularly, a tiny fraction of the corresponding rate for the public at large.<ref>Robert Lichter and Stanley Rothman’s 1986 study of the media’s attitudes and their influence on society, Op. cit.; David Weaver and G. Cleveland Wilhoit’s 1992 survey of 1,410 journalists, Op. cit.; Annenberg Public Policy Center and Annenberg Foundation Trust’s 2005 survey of 673 journalists from newspapers, television, magazines, radio, and Internet; Pew Research Center’s 2008 survey of 222 journalists and news executives.</ref>
* Fully 81 percent of news media professionals favor affirmative action in business and academia.<ref>Los Angeles Times 1985 survey of 2,700 journalists at 621 American newspapers, Op. cit.</ref>
* More than half of respondents said that adultery could be acceptable under certain circumstances; only 15 percent said it was always wrong.<ref>Robert Lichter and Stanley Rothman’s 1981 survey of 240 journalists at top media outlets, Op. cit.</ref>
* Between 67 and 76 percent were opposed to prayer being permitted in public schools.<ref>Los Angeles Times 1985 survey of 2,700 journalists at 621 American newspapers; Journalist and Financial Reporting’s 1988 poll of 151 business reporters from 30 major publications.</ref>
* In 1964, 94 percent of media professionals voted for Democrat Lyndon Johnson over Republican Barry Goldwater.<ref>Robert Lichter and Stanley Rothman’s 1981 survey of 240 journalists at top media outlets, Op. cit.</ref>
* In 1968, 86 percent voted for Democrat Hubert Humphrey over Republican Richard Nixon.<ref>Ibid.</ref>
* In 1972, 81 percent voted for Democrat George McGovern over the incumbent Nixon.<ref>Ibid.</ref>
* In 1976, 81 percent voted for Democrat Jimmy Carter over Republican Gerald Ford.<ref>Ibid.</ref>
* In 1980, twice as many cast their ballots for Carter rather than Republican Ronald Reagan.<ref>California State University survey of reporters from the 50 largest U.S. newspapers.</ref>
* In 1984, 58 percent supported Democrat Walter Mondale, whom Reagan defeated in the biggest landslide in presidential election history.<ref>Los Angeles Times 1985 survey of 2,700 journalists at 621 American newspapers, Op. cit.</ref>
* In 1988, White House correspondents from various major newspapers, television networks, magazines, and news services supported Democrat Michael Dukakis over Republican George H.W. Bush by a ratio of 12-to-1.<ref>U.S. News & World Report writer Kenneth Walsh’s 1995 study of 28 White House correspondents.</ref>
* In the 1992 Presidential election, among Washington bureau chiefs and congressional correspondents, the disparity was 89 percent vs. 7 percent, in Clinton’s favor over the incumbent Bush.<ref>1996 Freedom Forum survey of 139 Washington bureau chiefs and congressional correspondents, Op. cit.</ref>
* All told, White House correspondents during the late ’80s and early ’90s voted for Democrats at 7 times the rate at which they voted for Republicans.<ref>U.S. News & World Report writer Kenneth Walsh’s 1995 study of 28 White House correspondents, Op. cit.</ref>
* In a 2004, poll of campaign journalists, those based outside of Washington, D.C., supported Democrat John Kerry over Republican George W. Bush by a ratio of 3-to-1. Those based inside the Beltway favored Kerry by a 12-to-1 ratio<ref>.New York Times columnist John Tierney’s 2004 survey of 153 campaign journalists covering the 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston, Massachusetts.</ref>
* In a 2004 nationwide poll of 300 newspaper and television journalists, 52 percent supported Kerry, while 19 percent supported Bush.<ref>University of Connecticut Department of Public Policy’s 2005 survey of 300 television and newspaper journalists nationwide.</ref>
* In a 2008 survey of 144 journalists nationwide, journalists were 8 times likelier to make campaign contributions to Democrats than to Republicans.<ref>MSNBC investigative reporter Bill Dedman’s study of the campaign contributions of 144 journalists.</ref>
* A 2008 Investors Business Daily study put the campaign donation ratio at 11.5-to-1, in favor of Democrats. In terms of total dollars given, the ratio was 15-to-1.<ref>William Tate’s July 2008 report in Investor’s Business Daily.</ref>

*In a 1988 survey of business reporters, 54 percent of respondents identified themselves as Democrats, 9 percent as Republicans.<ref>Journalist and Financial Reporting’s 1988 poll of 151 business reporters, Op. cit.</ref>
* In a 1992 poll of journalists working for newspapers, magazines, radio, and television, 44 percent called themselves Democrats, 16 percent Republicans.<ref>David Weaver and G. Cleveland Wilhoit’s 1992 survey of 1,410 journalists, Op. cit.</ref>
* In a 1996 poll of 1,037 reporters at 61 newspapers, 61 percent identified themselves as Democrats, 15 percent as Republicans.<ref>American Society of Newspaper editors 1996 survey of 1,037 reporters at 61 newspapers of all sizes nationwide.</ref>
* In a 2001 Kaiser Family Foundation poll, media professionals were nearly 7 times likelier to call themselves Democrats rather than Republicans<ref>.Kaiser Family Foundation 1996 poll of 301 “media professionals,” 300 “policymakers,” and 1,206 members of the general public.</ref>
* In a 1981 study of 240 journalists nationwide, 65 percent identified themselves as liberals, 17 percent as conservatives.<ref>Robert Lichter and Stanley Rothman’s 1986 study of the media’s attitudes and their influence on society, Op. cit.</ref>
* In a 1983 study of news reporters, executives, and staffers, 32 percent identified themselves as liberals, 11 percent as conservatives.<ref>David Weaver and G. Cleveland Wilhoit’s 1982-83 study of more than 1,000 reporters, executives, and staffers nationwide.</ref>
* In a 1992 study of more than 1,400 journalists, 44 percent identified themselves as liberals, 22 percent as conservatives.<ref>David Weaver and G. Cleveland Wilhoit’s 1992 survey of 1,410 journalists, Op. cit.</ref>
* In a 1996 study of Washington bureau chiefs and congressional correspondents, 61 percent identified themselves as liberals, 9 percent as conservatives.<ref>1996 Freedom Forum survey of 139 Washington bureau chiefs and congressional correspondents, Op. cit.</ref>
* In a 1996 study of 1,037 journalists, the respondents identified themselves as liberals 4 times more frequently than as conservatives. Among journalists working for newspapers with circulations exceeding 50,000, the ratio of liberals to conservatives was 5.4 to 1.<ref>American Society of Newspaper editors 1996 survey, Op. cit.</ref>
* In a 2001 Kaiser Family Foundation study of media professionals, the ratio of self-identified liberals to conservatives was 4.2 to 1.<ref>Kaiser Family Foundation 1996 poll of 301 “media professionals,” 300 “policymakers,” and 1,206 members of the general public, Op. cit.</ref>
* In a 2004 Pew Research Center study of journalists and media executives, the ratio of self-identified liberals to conservatives was 4.9 to 1.<ref>Pew Research Center 2004 poll of 547 journalists and media executives, including 247 at national-level media outlets.</ref>
* In a 2005 University of Connecticut study of 300 journalists, the liberal-to-conservative ratio was 2.8 to 1.<ref>University of Connecticut Department of Public Policy’s 2005 survey of 300 television and newspaper journalists nationwide, Op. cit.</ref>
* In a 2005 Annenberg Public Policy Center poll of nearly 700 journalists, the liberal-to-conservative ratio was 3.4 to 1.<ref>Annenberg Public Policy Center and Annenberg Foundation Trust’s 2005 survey of 673 journalists, Op. cit.</ref>
* In a 2007 Pew Research Center study of journalists and news executives, the ratio was 4 liberals for each conservative.<ref>Pew Research Center’s 2007 survey of 222 journalists and news executives at national outlets.</ref>

A similar landmark study was conducted in 1990, examining the political leanings of the individuals, rather than the organizations, who were most often cited or quoted as experts on various topics in the news. The examination showed that on the subject of welfare and related issues, liberal experts were quoted 75 percent of the time, conservatives 22 percent. On consumer issues, the liberal-conservative ratio was 63 percent to 22 percent. On environmental issues, the ratio was 79 percent to 18 percent. And regarding nuclear energy, the ratio was 77 percent to 20 percent.<ref>Robert Lichter, Stanley Rothman, and Linda Lichter, The Media Elite: America’s New Power Brokers (New York: Hastings House, 1990).</ref>

The decidedly liberal majority in news media is similar to that seen in American colleges and faculty, which most journalists were influenced by. A major study showed that 50% of American college faculty identified themselves as Democrats and 11% as Republicans (with 33% being Independent, and 5% identifying themselves with another party). 72% described themselves as "to the left of center," including 18% who were strongly left. Only 15% described themselves as right of center, including only 3% who were "strongly right."<ref>North American Academic Study Survey (NAASS) of students, faculty and administrators at colleges and universities in the United States and Canada 1999. The Berkeley Electronic Press</ref><ref>[http://montages.blogspot.com/2005/04/conservatives-underrepresented-in.html Conservatives: Underrepresented in Academia?]</ref>

==See Also==
*[[Anti-Defamation League]]
*[[Previous Breaking News/Liberal bias|Examples of liberal bias from previous "Breaking News" articles]]
*[[More News/Liberal Bias|Articles about '''Liberal Bias''' from "More News"]]
*[[Homosexuality and the Media]]
*[[Conservative bias]]
*[[Conservative Links]]
*[[Professor values]]
*[[Journalistic malpractice]]

{{Examples of liberal bias}}

==External links==

*[http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/biasbasics2admissions.asp Media Bias Basics] - Admissions of Liberal Bias
*[http://www.ihatethemedia.com IHateTheMedia.com] - Pointing out Liberal Bias daily
*[http://books.google.com/books?id=fH5H492nmtMC&pg=PA271&lpg=PA271&dq=newsweek+war+against+christianity&source=bl&ots=x8qHuakjQh&sig=sDfIvPwS9893hYoJVO8Tfz8DDrE&hl=en&ei=jUY6SrCIG9G_twfgg6HjDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4#PPP1,M1 Persecution, By David Limbaugh]

{{liberalism}}
[[Category: Deceit]]
[[Category: Liberalism]]

Homosexuality in the media

2010-01-08T18:27:03Z

CharlesGebler: /*See Also*/

{{homosexuality}}
In the [[Western World]], the media are generally tolerant towards homosexuality - as tolerant as their audience can stand. For example, the [[Traditional Values Coalition]] states the following regarding the reporting of [[homosexuality]] and the [[United States]] media:
{{cquote|The [[National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association]] has hundreds of members and is heavily funded by Hearst newspapers, Knight-Ridder, [[CBS News]], [[CNN]], Gannett, [[NBC]], [[Los Angeles Times]], [[Fox News]], and more. Major newspapers throughout the U.S. have homosexual activists on their staffs who filter what you read about homosexuality.<ref>http://www.traditionalvalues.org/pdf_files/Homosexuality101.pdf</ref>}}

==Overview==
Regarding the influence the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association has, the organization [[Accuracy in Media]] reported the following from the group's 1999 convention: "In his keynote speech, journalist Charles Kaiser boasted that "the editor and the publisher of every major news organization in America, except for [[Peter Jennings]], has by now attended [one of our events].""<ref name=%26quot%3Baim3367%26quot%3B%26gt%3Bhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaim%2Eorg%2Fmedia_monitor%2FA3367_0_2_0_C%2F%26lt%3B%2Fref%26gt%3B

[[Joseph Farah]], who founded [[WorldNetDaily]], wrote an article on the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association (NGJA) in which he stated that he had covered the group for some time.<ref name=%26quot%3Bwnd%26quot%3B%26gt%3Bhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ewnd%2Ecom%2Fnews%2Farticle%2Easp%3FARTICLE_ID%3D15046%26lt%3B%2Fref%26gt%3B However, it wasn't until their 10th anniversary that they stopped portraying themselves as an objective professional organization that promotes higher journalistic standards in regards to the issue of homosexuality and showed themselves as promoters of the [[Homosexual Agenda|homosexual cause]], attempting to gain supposedly "equal" rights.<ref name=%26quot%3Bwnd%26quot%3B />

In September of 2000, Mr. Farah stated the following regarding the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association:
[[Image:Farah.jpg|thumbnail|200px|left|[[Joseph Farah]]]]
{{cquote|It is...a group that has bent so far toward changing the newsroom culture that the big debate in [[San Francisco]] was whether journalists should even bother getting other points of view on homosexuals' issues and stories.

Did you catch that? What was on the table at the NLGJA conference was the question whether allowing those with differing viewpoints on homosexuality and homosexual rights activists is worth it!

CBS correspondent and NLJGA member Jeffrey Kofman made himself clear: "The argument (is): Why do we constantly see in coverage of gay and lesbian, [[bisexual]] and [[transgender]] issues the homophobes and the fag-haters quoted in stories when, of course, we don't do that with Jews, blacks, et cetera?"

Paula Madison, vice president of diversity at NBC and news director for the NBC's New York City affiliate WNBC, added: "I agree with him. I don't see why we would seek out ... the absurd, inane point of view just to get another point of view."

Kofman rejoined: "All of us have seen and continue to see a lot of coverage that includes perspectives on gay issues that include people who just simply are intolerant and perhaps not qualified as well."

All this in the name of [[Political Correctness|political correctness]] and conviction. <ref name=%26quot%3Bwnd%26quot%3B />}}

Joseph Farah makes an excellent point above regarding journalist objectivity and homosexual activist journalist given the American media's unwillingness to cover some of the unpleasant [[Homosexuality Statistics|facts about homosexuality]]. For example, John Cloud is a homosexual activist who writes for [[Time magazine]] and wrote the October 10, 1995 cover story for Time Magazine which was entitled “The Battle Over [[Teen Homosexuality|Gay Teens]].”<ref name=%26quot%3Btrv%26quot%3B%26gt%3Bhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Etraditionalvalues%2Eorg%2Fmodules%2Ephp%3Fsid%3D2460%26lt%3B%2Fref%26gt%3B John Cloud’s article rendered a positive portrayal homosexual teens who are establishing networks of Gay Straight Alliance clubs on campuses all over the United States.<ref name=%26quot%3Btrv%26quot%3B /> According to the Traditional Values Coalition, most readers of Time magazine were unaware that John Cloud is a homosexual who had previously written for the [[liberal]] Washington City Paper in Washington, DC. about his visit to a "homosexual sex orgy club in Washington, DC."<ref name=%26quot%3Btrv%26quot%3B />

[[Accuracy in Media]] stated the following regarding a convention of the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association:
{{cquote|Media organizations which underwrote the convention included NBC News, Times Inc., Turner Broadcasting, Knight-Ridder, the Washington Post and Fox News Network. That’s right - Fox News. This is supposed to be a conservative network. ABC, NBC, CBS, the New York Times, and USA Today all sent recruiters to the event, to hire open gays as journalists. Fitzpatrick comments, "By treating the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association as a legitimate counterpart to black and Hispanic journalists’ associations, these media organizations showed that they agree with the notion that homosexuals, a group defined by behavior rather than immutable characteristics, constitute a bona fide minority."<ref name=%26quot%3Baim3367%26quot%3B />}}
==Homosexuality in the Media and the Influence of the New York Times==
[[Image:Arthursulzbergerjr.jpg|right|thumb|Arthur Sulzberger Jr.]]
[[John Stossel]] is an author, consumer reporter, and a co-anchor for the [[ABC News]] show [[20/20]]. [[Cybercast News Service]] states the following regarding regarding the influence of the [[New York Times]] and [[Washington Post]] on other media:
{{cquote|While the newspapers reach only a fraction of people compared to the television networks, he said radio and television producers rely heavily on their contents.

"The reason the Times, and to a lesser extent the Post, are so important, and they are, is because the TV and radio - all of the media - copy it sycophantically," he [John Stossel] said. "That's how bias at the Times becomes bias in other media."<ref>http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200401/CUL20040128a.html</ref>}}

The [[New York Times|New York Times clearly promotes the homosexual agenda]].<ref name=%26quot%3Baim3014%26quot%3B%26gt%3Bhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaim%2Eorg%2Fmedia_monitor%2FA3014_0_2_0_C%2F%26lt%3B%2Fref%26gt%3B%26lt%3Bref%26gt%3Bhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ecnsnews%2Ecom%2Ffacts%2F2007%2Ffacts2007914%2Easp%26lt%3B%2Fref%26gt%3B%26lt%3Bref%26gt%3Bhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaim%2Eorg%2Fmedia_monitor%2FA1442_0_2_0_C%2F%26lt%3B%2Fref%26gt%3B Accuracy in Media quotes a report by [[Peter LaBarbera]] stating that Richard Berke, the national political correspondent for the New York Times, made an appearance on behalf of the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association and revealed that three-quarters of the people who now decide what goes on the front page of the New York Times are "not so closeted homosexuals."<ref name=%26quot%3Baim3014%26quot%3B />

==Newsweek's advocacy of homosexuality==
Newsweek is seen as manifesting an antipathy to [[Evangelical Christianity]], as part of the [[liberal media]]. Consistent with such, on Dec. 15, 2008, Newsweek proactively attacked historical Biblical morality in regards to [[homosexuality and biblical interpretation]],<ref>“Our Mutual Joy, Dec 15, 2008 by religion editor Lisa Miller</ref> while such attempts have resulted in extensive refutation by evangelical scholars and writers.<ref>[http://www.robgagnon.net/NewsweekMillerHomosexResp.htm More than “Mutual Joy”: Lisa Miller of Newsweek against Scripture and Jesus]</ref><ref>[http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html Homosexual relations and the Bible]</ref><ref>[http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=2881 Turning the Bible on its Head -- Newsweek Goes for Gay Marriage]</ref>

==Coverage of the Murders of Jesse Dirkhising and Matthew Shephard==
Accuracy in Media states the following regarding [[Liberal bias|liberal media bias]] in regards to the issue of homosexuality in the media:
{{cquote|A year ago we had raised the issue of [[Jesse Dirkhising]], the 13 year-old boy who was raped and murdered by two homosexuals in Arkansas in September 1999. The media's general failure to cover the murder stands in sharp contrast to the massive coverage of the death of [[Matthew Shepard]], the gay college student in Wyoming. The Times [New York Times] hadn't published a word on the Dirkhising case.<ref>http://www.aim.org/media_monitor/A1006_0_2_0_C/</ref>}}
Actually, according to one of the leading police investigators for the murder, the case of [[Matthew Shepard]] [[Hate crime|might not even have been a hate crime]].<ref>http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=277685&page=3</ref>

[[NewsMax]] reported:
{{cquote|McGowan did a Nexus search and learned that the Shepard case generated a massive 3,007 stories. "And when the case finally went to trial ... it was all over the broadcast news, received front-page coverage in all major newspapers, and was featured on the cover of Time magazine. (In all, the New York Times ran 195 stories about the case.)

"In the month after the Dirkhising murder, however, Nexus recorded only 46 stories...

He sums up by quoting the surprisingly candid [[Andrew Sullivan]] - an openly gay columnist for the liberal [[New Republic]].

Wrote Sullivan: "The Shepard case was hyped for political reasons: to build support for inclusion of homosexuals in a federal [[hate crimes]] law. The Dirkhising case was ignored for political reasons: squeamishness about reporting a story that could feed anti-gay prejudice and the lack of any pending legislation to hang a story on ... Some deaths - if they affect a politically protected class - are worth more than others. Other deaths, those that do not fit a politically correct profile, are left to oblivion."<ref name=%26quot%3Bnewsmax%26quot%3B%26gt%3Bhttp%3A%2F%2Farchive%2Enewsmax%2Ecom%2Farchives%2Farticles%2F2002%2F2%2F8%2F165348%2Eshtml%26lt%3B%2Fref%26gt%3B%7D%7D

==Fox News Channel and the Issue of Homosexuality==
As noted earlier, [[Accuracy in Media]] stated the following regarding the Fox News Channel:
{{cquote|Media organizations which underwrote the convention included NBC News, Times Inc., Turner Broadcasting, Knight-Ridder, the Washington Post and Fox News Network. That’s right - Fox News. This is supposed to be a conservative network.<ref name=%26quot%3Baim3367%26quot%3B />}}

The American Family Association reported the following in regards to [[Bill O'Reilly]] who host the O'Reilly Report which is a popular program on the Fox News Channel:
{{cquote|On February 11, 2004, Bill O'Reilly, host of The O'Reilly Factor on the Fox News Channel, featured Kevin Jennings, the executive director of GLSEN (the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network.) Jennings, former teacher turned homosexual activist, along with a lesbian counterpart, discussed GLSEN's new pro-homosexual curriculum on marriage being marketed to children and youth in public schools all across America under the guise of "tolerance."...

O'Reilly, watched heavily by conservatives and Christians alike, shocked much of his constituency on September 3, 2002 when he publicly announced his support of homosexual rights in the nation's largest “gay” publication, ''The Advocate''. His sympathetic, lenient views on “gay” adoption and his mixed-message stance on “gay” marriage have caused great dissent among his loyalists - and no doubt cost him viewers.<ref>http://www.afa.net/homosexual_agenda/GetArticle.asp?id=115</ref>}}

[[WorldNetDaily]] stated the following regarding O'Reilly and his exchange with the [[Ex-Homosexuals|ex-homosexual]] and evangelical minister Stephen Bennett:
{{cquote|Fox News is threatening to sue a prominent evangelical minister in the ex-homosexual movement who engaged in a volatile exchange over biblical morality on the top-rated television program "The O'Reilly Factor" in September.

Stephen Bennett, who says he left his homosexual lifestyle nearly 11 years ago, has distributed a 60-minute audio tape program called the "The O'Reilly Shocker," in which he responds to host Bill O'Reilly's characterization of people who take the Bible literally as "religious fanatics.".

Bennett said he has received hundreds of e-mails from viewers of the segment who said they were outraged at O'Reilly's "anger and verbal abuse." <ref>http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30300</ref>}}

In response to the threatened lawsuit of the Fox News Channel the Agape Press reported the following:
{{cquote|But Mike DePrimo, senior litigation counsel for the American Family Association Center for Law & Policy, which represents Bennett, says Bennett has a right to distribute a recording of the program -- and that his use of the tape is legal under copyright law's allowance of fair use and comment.

"The law provides that even copyrighted material may be used, provided it's used not for commercial gain but for comment," DePrimo says. "Stephen Bennett used the material from the O'Reilly show simply to rebut the arguments O'Reilly put forward."

The attorney implies there may be another reason the popular O'Reilly wants distribution of the tape stopped -- and it has to do with image. "O'Reilly promotes himself as a [[conservative]]," DePrimo explains. "In fact, Bennett's tape shows that O'Reilly is simply another media elite who's advancing the [[Homosexual Agenda|homosexual agenda]] -- and he doesn't want to be exposed for what he is."<ref>http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/1/afa/32003a.asp</ref>}}
==Washington Times Reports American Backlash Against Media Coverage of Homosexuality==
The [[Media Research Center]] reported the following regarding a 2003 news story by the [[Washington Times]]:
{{cquote|Washington Times - "Homosexuality seen as accepted by media," by Julia Duin
July 29, 2003

...Last night, "Boy Meets Boy," a dating game for homosexual men where some straight men are thrown into the mix, aired on [[NBC]]'s Bravo cable channel. This came on the heels of "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy," another new Bravo show that last week got bumped up to prime time Thursday, the same night that NBC airs its homosexual-themed sitcom "Will & Grace."... But there has been a backlash against homosexuality, according to a poll released yesterday by [[USA Today]]....opposition to same-sex "marriages" had risen to 57 percent, the highest opposition since the question was first posed in 2000. "People feel there is a wave coming, so there's a resistance," said Tim Graham, an analyst with the Media Research Center. "People ask if anyone is going to fight. This [[White House]] won't. The [[George Bush|Bush]] administration knows what the media hot buttons are."<ref>http://www.mediaresearch.org/inthenews/2003/news0703.asp</ref>}}
==Homosexuality in the Media and Viewers Opinions==
In June of 2007, [[Human Events]] reported the following:
{{cquote|A new special report by the Culture and Media Institute (CMI) indicates that watching too much television could be hazardous to your moral health.

The report, The Media Assault on American Values, reveals that media messages could be undermining pillars of America’s cultural edifice: strength of character, sexual morality and respect for God. The report is based upon findings of a major scientific survey commissioned by CMI, a division of the Media Research Center.

The National Cultural Values Survey reveals a striking correlation between greater exposure to television and lenient moral views. Heavy television viewers (four hours or more per evening) are less committed to virtues like honesty and charity, and more permissive about [[sex]], [[abortion]] and [[homosexuality]]. Light television viewers (one hour or less per evening) are more likely to attend religious services and abide by [[God]]’s principles....

Ten Americans believe Hollywood is harming the nation’s moral condition for every one who thinks Hollywood is helping.<ref>http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=21069</ref>}}

==Prevalence of Homosexuality in American Television Media==
[[Image:OutTV.jpg|200px|thumb|left|There are several all-homosexual television channels, including OutTV]]
In October of 2007 the pro-homosexuality [[Journal of Homosexuality]] published a journal article about the prevalence of homosexual and bisexual content in television. Below is an excerpt from the journal article abstract:
{{cquote|Two annual content analyses of programming from the 2001-2002 and 2002-2003 television seasons...were conducted to assess the presence of behaviors and verbal messages related to the sexuality of gays, lesbians, and bisexuals. Sexual content associated with nonheterosexuals was found in about 15% of programs overall; however, rates of occurrence within episodes were low. Of 14 genres, only movies and variety/comedy shows had substantial percentages of programs that contained nonheterosexual content. Programs on commercial broadcast networks were less likely to have nonheterosexual content than those on cable networks, especially those on premium cable movie networks.<ref>http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/haworth/jh/2007/00000052/F0020003/art00008;jsessionid=1id6c8peakf5e.alice?format=print</ref>}}

In August of 2007, the Baptist Press reported the following regarding homosexuality in the media:
{{cquote|As previously reported in Baptist Press, the [[Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation]] (GLAAD) released Aug. 6 its first-ever "Network Responsibility Index" which examined the inclusion of "lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender" themes or characters on TV.

The index found that 15 percent of all of ABC's primetime programming hours during a 12-month span contained either homosexual characters or the discussion of homosexuality. The CW was second at 12 percent, followed by CBS (9 percent), NBC (7 percent) and Fox (6 percent). For their content ABC was rated "good," the CW, CBS and NBC "fair" and Fox "poor.".

Television's positive portrayal has certainly contributed to the rise in the acceptance of homosexuality as natural, normal and healthy.<ref>http://www.bpnews.net/BPFirstPerson.asp?ID=26269</ref>}}

However, there may have been a backlash or public pressure against the promotion of homosexuality vis à vis network television, and the college newspaper ''The Loquitur'' reported the following in October of 2007:
{{cquote|Network television has begun to cancel homosexual characters from their sitcoms while cable television has cast more this year. The organization, Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, GLAAD, is in upset over the decrease of homosexual characters on network television.<ref>http://media.www.theloquitur.com/media/storage/paper226/news/2007/10/11/AE/Sitcoms.Cancel.Homosexuality-3033576.shtml</ref>}}

Increasingly, there are shows which feature gays as lead characters, often in the role of the [[gay cupid]]. For example, ''[[Will and Grace]]'', where the homosexual, Will, aids his childhood friend Grace in dating, or the show ''Queer Eye for the Straight Guy'', where "talented" homosexuals impose their style upon "desperate" heterosexuals in need of love advice. Many other shows have a [[token gay]] character, which appears with fair regularity. Furthermore, several shows mask homosexual behavior by displaying it as the behavior of heterosexuals or those with an urge to experiment in their sexuality. A well-known example in the television program ''[[Sex and the City]]''.

==Homosexuality in the Media and American History==
In 2002, [[NewsMax]] reported the following about homosexuality and the United States media:
{{cquote|Four decades ago, media coverage of homosexuality was universally hostile. McGowan recalls Time magazine's description of homosexuality as a "pathetic little second-rate substitute for reality, a pitiable flight from life" deserving "no encouragement, no glamorization, no rationalization, no fake status as minority martyrdom, no sophistry about simple differences in taste, and above all no pretence that it is anything but a pernicious sickness."

Straight News quoted [[Mike Wallace]] as calling the [http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality#Homosexuality_and_Promiscuity average homosexual "promiscuous"] and "not interested in or capable of a lasting relationship like that of a heterosexual.<ref name=%26quot%3Bnewsmax%26quot%3B />}}

The pro-homosexuality [[Journal of Homosexuality]] also stated the following regarding homosexuality and television media: "Before 1970, almost no gay characters could be found on television, and their relative absence from the screen continued until the 1990s..."<ref>http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2000838</ref>

==See Also==
*[[Anti-Defamation League]]
*[[Homosexuality Research]]
*[[Homosexuality]]
== External Links ==
*[http://www.albertmohler.com/commentary_read.php?cdate=2003-07-31 New Study: The Media Push Homosexuality] by Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., July 31, 2003

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Homosexuality]]
[[Category:Media]]
[[Category:Liberal Bias]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Liberal Deceit]]

Liberal bias

2010-01-07T17:47:07Z

CharlesGebler: /*See Also*/

Liberal denial

2010-01-07T13:58:31Z

CharlesGebler: /*Seealso*/

'''Liberal denial''' is the tendency of [[liberals]] to conceal, deny or censor the truth for ideological reasons. A list of the top ''common'' instances of [[liberal denial]] are the following:

# Liberals deny the very real existence of [[Hell]]. [[Jesus]] talked about Hell more than Heaven.
# Liberals deny how they censor the [[Bible]] from their daily activities, and encourage the censorship for others too.
# Liberals deny that [[Fidel Castro]], who has not been seen in public since his intestinal surgery 3.5 years ago, is likely dead.
# Liberals deny the [[Nobel Prize]] is an award given by liberals to other liberals, and sometimes even granted in an awkward manner designed to punish a critic of liberal falsehoods.<ref>E.g., the granting of the Nobel Prize to an understudy of [[Fred Hoyle]] to punish him.</ref>
# Liberals deny that we are suffering from global ''cooling'', with record ''low'' temperatures disproving their hoax of [[global warming]].
# Liberals deny how they deify government officials, similar to how communists deified Stalin and Lenin and still deify Castro.<ref>See, e.g., liberal adulation of [[Ted Kennedy]] despite his paucity of achievements.</ref>
# Liberals deny how fellow travelers engage in [[deceit]], or at least refuse to admit it.
# Liberals deny they are [[liberal]], and that most of the media are [[liberal]].
# [[Hollywood values]], [[professor values]] and general [[liberal]] values have consequences for those who believe in them, and also for innocent victims.
# Liberals deny that they have censored [[prayer]] in [[public school]].<ref>A [[public school]] student who once "tape recorded a teacher making religious remarks to his students" to complain about it then later objected to a textbook explaining how prayer is censored from [[public school]] schools by court decisions. [http://abcnews.go.com/US/WireStory?id=4614012]</ref>
# Liberals deny that a woman significantly reduces her risk of breast cancer by having children rather than [[abortions]]
# About half of promiscuous people carry sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), and those STDs cause infertility<ref>"Among those who admitted having sex, the rate was even more disturbing -- 40 percent had an STD."[http://www.tulsaworld.com/lifestyle/article.aspx?articleID=20080312_1_C12_hUShe15125]</ref>
# The strident promoters of [[evolution]] generally have weaker credentials than advocates of [[intelligent design]]<ref>See, e.g., [[Richard Sternberg]]</ref>
# college faculties at nearly every American school are completely dominated by [[liberals]], and have virtually no [[conservatives]]
# [[homosexuality]] shortens lifespan for a wide variety of reasons
# reducing the number of guns, which are primarily defensive weapons, results in an increase in crime
# [[Liberals]] deny that the war in [[Iraq]] was needed and also deny that the surge has worked
# In denial that [[Hitler]] and the [[Nazi]] party were in fact [[Liberals]] (anti-Semitism is a well-documented characteristic of [[Liberal Christianity]] as is the [[PETA]]-like Green wing of the Third Reich<ref> [http://www.spunk.org/texts/places/germany/sp001630/peter.html Fascist Ecology:
The "Green Wing" of the Nazi Party and its Historical Antecedents]</ref>)

More generally, liberals also deny:

# That [[Obama]] ran the dirtiest campaign since Johnson
# More than 80% of child molesters are pornography addicts
# People like [[young mass murderers]] who take [[atheistic]] beliefs to their logical conclusions are not "crazy" or "insane", but are true believers.
# That [[young mass murderers]] fit the profile of [[public school]]-trained [[atheism]]
# The intellectual justification for [[Hitler]]'s attempt to build a master Aryan race was the [[theory of evolution]]
# That [[feminists]] censor discussion about differences between men and women, and boys and girls.
# That [[Lawrence Summers]] was fired as President of [[Harvard]] for making a [[political correctness|politically incorrect]] suggestion about women and [[math]] aptitude
# [[Socialized_medicine|state run health care]] has lead to Islamic terrorism in Britain, and would do so in the US. <ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMu6wCqdeyQ ''FOX News analyzes the new terror in state healthcare.''</ref>
# obesity is a bigger problem than hunger in the Western world
# That a school having virtually no [[conservative]] teachers and many [[atheists]] and [[liberals]] is a [[liberal]] school
# That [[liberals]] attempt to intimidate and ostracize [[conservatives]], particularly in school environments and some occupations.<ref>See [[liberals and friendship]].</ref>
# That [[liberals]] support taxpayer-funded [[abortion]]
# That girls and women in sports have debilitating ACL knee injuries at 3-4 times the rate of men,<ref>''Compare'' [http://www.universityhealthmatters.com/article.php?artid=50] (with an explanation of why there is a big difference) ''with'' [http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/18/health/18knee.html?ex=1204088400&en=3a5abfaa6104ac63&ei=5070&emc=eta1 New York Times] (downplaying the difference and pretending that no one knows why). The New York Times denies overwhelming evidence, including the following:
:"Female athletes, particularly basketball players, are far more likely than their male counterparts to suffer ACL [Anterior Cruciate Ligament] injuries." Stephen Hargis, "Girls have more torn ACLs," Chattanooga Times Free Press (Tennessee), D1 (Feb. 4, 2005). According to the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, the risk of women tearing their ACL is 1 in 100. This number drops significantly to only 1 in 500 for men. See Nikki Usher, "Knee injury takes toll on girls playing soccer five times more likely than males to suffer a torn ACL," Philadelphia Inquirer, A01 (Nov. 29, 2004). "Compared with guys, female athletes run an eight-times-greater risk of tearing the ACL, a fibrous band that connects the shinbone (tibia) to the thighbone (femur). Basketball, soccer and other sports that require cutting moves or jump shots can put athletes at risk." Kathleen Fackelmann, "Girls face higher knee injury risk," USA Today, 15B (Aug. 24, 2004). Timothy Hewett, PhD, the lead researcher on a definitive study at the Sports Medicine Biodynamics Center at the University of Cincinnati, says this is "close to a billion-dollar problem in girls and women in the USA. ... Even after girls have recovered from the acute injury, the changes in the joint may set the stage for osteoarthritis of the knee ...." ''Id.'' That obvious suspicion was quickly confirmed: a study subsequently published in Arthritis & Rheumatism demonstrated that "more than half of ... 103 soccer players, who were ages 14 to 28 at the time of the ACL injury, suffered osteoarthritis of the knee at the time of the study -- about 12 years later." Kathleen Fackelmann, "Girls' knee injuries have later consequences," USA Today, 9D (Oct. 7, 2004). "Many of the women, who were about 31 by that time, also said they had pain or some other disability that made it hard to conduct daily activities." ''Id.''</ref> and are vulnerable to other injuries<ref>"Amber Scull ruptured her spleen after she was tackled during a practice drill at Nature Coast Tech in Brooksville 2 1/2 months ago. Had she [not] arrived at the hospital 30 minutes later, doctors told her mother, she might have died." [http://www.sptimes.com/2004/01/06/news_pf/Sports/Girls_face_dangers_on.shtml]</ref>
# That the numerous premature deaths of [[Hollywood]] stars are the result of [[Hollywood values]]<ref>Liberal [[Wikipedia]] lists numerous [[actor]]s who died of drug overdoses, but will not acknowledge the role played by [[Hollywood values]], for which Wikipedia does not even have an entry. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_drug-related_deaths]</ref>
# That [[homeschoolers]] often do better than those who attend [[public school]]
# That [[culture]] affects [[politics]], and people's views and lifestyles
# That successful [[democracy]], both historically and logically, is the result of [[Protestantism|Protestant]] [[Christianity]]<ref>[http://www.apologetics.com/default.jsp?bodycontent=/articles/cultural_apologetics/snyder-democracy1.html Calvinism and the Success of Liberal Democracy, by John Snyder]</ref>
# That [[Ronald Reagan]]'s public exhortation, "[[Mikhail Gorbachev|Mr. Gorbachev]], tear down this wall," helped cause the nearly 30-year-old [[Berlin Wall]] later be torn down
# That [[gun control]] increases [[crime]]
# That reducing [[taxes]] stimulates the [[economy]]
# That choosing [[abortion]] over childbirth increases the risk of [[breast cancer]]
# That the [[mainstream media]] is [[bias]]ed
# That privately-run [[transport]] is more efficient than government-run transport
# That [[universal health care]] is inferior medical care
# That [[Labor union|union]]s interfere with [[employment]] opportunities
# That [[liberal]] leaders engage in shocking wrongdoing, [[Liberal hypocrisy|hypocrisy]], and abuse of power<ref>See, e.g., leading [[liberal]] [[Eliot Spitzer]] and how fellow [[liberals]] downplayed or were silent about his misconduct.</ref>
# That ideas do matter, and can cause great harm, including liberal falsehoods
# That [[Islam]]ic extremism is a threat to the [[Western civilization]]<ref>Leftist [[Sam Harris]] admitted and complained about this liberal denial [http://www.cmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061009/REPOSITORY/610090301/1028/OPINION02 here].</ref>
# That banning [[same-sex marriage]] is analogous to banning [[polygamy]]
# That aggressive interrogation is often the only way to obtain answers from [[terrorists]]
# how the [[liberal]] ideology is pushed on unsuspecting others, particularly youngsters
# That free trade strengthens global democracies
# That a child in a mother's womb has rights established by the [[Constitution]]
# That a [[vote]] for (yea) or a vote against (nea) is an absolute position
# That you can be held accountable for the statements uttered
# That climate forecasts 50 years from now are as inaccurate as 15 days from now
# That politicians that proclaim 'Change' actually do not break with policies of the past
# That removing [[Saddam Hussein]] from power was a good thing.
# That eating [[meat]] and [[dairy]] is important for physical and mental health.
# That [[marijuana]] use has lasting psychological effects.
# That illegal immigrants contribute to crime and poverty in the towns and cities they occupy.
# That English will cease being the language of the United States in 20 years unless it is protected as the [[official language]] (and that this would be a loss if it happened).
# That President Bush didn't cause Hurricane Katrina.
# That President Clinton was responsible for Rwanda inaction.
# That the Democratic party discriminates against African-Americans.
# That restricting free speech by the [[Fairness Doctrine]] is actually not fair nor democratic.
# That we can drill oil our way out of high gas prices.
# That we can't replace our dependence on oil with green technologies, when in fact we need both oil and green technologies to solve our energy crisis.
# That opposing same-sex [[marriage]] is justified and point to decriminalized interracial marriage bans as proof.
# That they are [[intolerant]] of opposing viewpoints and then try to stifle further discussion.
# That [[socialism]] and liberalism have the same political agenda.
# That [[God]] should have a place in government
# That modern drilling methods result in minimal environmental impact, even if they were implemented in uninhabited lands such as the [[Arctic National Wildlife Refuge]]
# That companies like [[Exxon]] should pay billions of dollars in damages to the general public, ''in addition'' to the money they spend to clean up industrial accidents and to recompense those directly affected
# That [[selective logging]] keeps forests healthier by reducing the risk of wildfire
# That high food prices are not caused by [[ethanol]] production, but rather by the million acres of crop- and pastureland that have been taken out of production in the interest of wildlife conservation.
# That the life of a human is more important than the life of an animal or plant.
# That modern technology can make [[coal]] clean
# That a fence is the most effective and ultimately, the most peaceful way to protect our large border from illegal immigrants trying to get in
# That socially dangerous people exhibit a well-documented pattern of reading habits
# That [[heavy metal]] music is generally anti-Christian and promotes themes such as drugs, sex and [[Satan]] worship.
# The existence of God and Jesus, our Lord and Savior.

Often [[liberal]]s refuse to admit that they are [[liberal]]s, in the hope of appearing more reasonable. [[Hillary Clinton]] refused to admit in a presidential debate in 2007 that she is a [[liberal]]. Similarly, [[Michael Dukakis]] refused for a while to admit that he was a [[liberal]] during the 1988 presidential campaign. Only out of desperation did Dukakis admit that he was a [[liberal]], and even then he admitted only that was a liberal like President [[Harry Truman]], who served 40 years earlier.

Liberals like to bash President Bush as a war monger and cite [[President Clinton]] for his eight years of peace and prosperity. Liberals will deny record low unemployment, more people owning their homes and President Bush going after [[terrorists]] while protecting Americans from further attacks. Liberals will selectively forget that during Clinton's term: the [[Rwanda]] massacre occurred, the bombing of the USS Cole, the war in the [[Balkans]], the two US embassies bombed in [[Africa]], the Kobar tower bombing in Saudi Arabia, the [[Somalia]] conflict, the missile strike against [[Afghanistan]] and the bombing campaign against Iraq. Also, [[liberals]] will deny that Clinton's economic policy ignored a series of high profile companies that eventually collapsed due to fraud: Enron, Tyco, Worldcom and Qwest.

== References ==
<references/>

== See also ==

*[[ACLU]]
*[[Longest liberal denials]]
{{liberalism}}
[[category:Liberal Traits]]