liberal media bias revealed! part deux

Recently, I suggested that the notion of a liberal media bias in Canada is artificially inflated. To corroborate, I posted the results of a study on the issue conducted by researchers at Ryerson's journalism school.

I was quickly reprimanded by my Conservaitve Compatriots, via the comments section and elsewhere in person. They pointed out that though this was an independent study conducted by professionals, though the methodology of the study seemed reasonable, the excerpt I posted had been published in the Toronto Star. Ergo, the study had lost all its legitimacy.

Hoisted by my own petard, eh?

Anyways, I thought we could develop this futher. I noticed that Lorrie Goldstein of the Toronto Sun had composed his own interpretation of the study at around the same time. His title- "Liberal bias? It's Not Just the CBC" - suggested a soundly differnt conclusion.

He beings with the deliberately misleading: ...According to a recent study by two Ryerson University journalism professors... Almost half of all Canadian television news directors, the individuals who have the most influence in determining what political news is covered on your favourite nightly newscast and how it is reported, vote Liberal

This seems shocking indeed - particularly at the time of print, when Stephen Harper was poised to challenge for prime ministership.

It is significantly less shocking when we examine the study itself. "Almost half" means 46%. The study was conducted in 2002. This was at a time when most polls suggested Liberal support at around 45%. An easy correlation that suggests journalists in this country are representative of trends generally.

Sorry Lorrie. In an effort to expose liberal media bias you have provided us with a but one example of the breathtaking bias that can go in the other direction.

"But wait," you all cry in consternation, "The Star and Sun have reached different conclusions based on their respective biases. How can you suggest that one is biased and the other is not?"

That would be a fair comment, if the article that appeared in the Star was not written by the professors that conducted the research themselves. The Star allowed for the reseachers to publish their conclusions ("There is no conspiracy, folks. And the numbers so far bear this out."). The Sun allowed a columnist to cite the research as evidence of exactly what the research says isn't true.

Stephen Harper can cry into his beer about the horrible inequities he must face. He and I both know that it just ain't true.

- Mike (SCG)