A Vast “Left Wing” Conspiracy

December 19, 2012

The unemployment rates stands at just under 8 percent and the federal debt has soared from $9 trillion when President Obama took office to more than $16 trillion.  The world is a more dangerous place, with Iran close to gaining nuclear capability.  New legislation is making a mess of both the healthcare and financial industries, which will both be largely controlled by the federal government.  Yet President Obama was elected to a second term.

Did a biased media make it all possible? 

Columnist Bill Press, who regularly defends President Obama and refers to Republicans as being “clueless,” recently wrote that liberal media bias is “a myth.”  He has even claimed that the media has a ”right-wing” bias … which, I guess, would explain the low ratings for his radio show.  The op-ed editor of my local newspaper once published a commentary claiming that there is no media bias.  Yet his commentary used the term “right wing” three times.  It didn’t use the term “left wing.”

There are plenty of watchdog groups, like newsbusters.org, that post daily examples of media bias, but it’s difficult to prove ongoing bias based on anecdotal evident.  So let’s start with a simple assumption: if the media is objective, it should use terms that are critical of liberals with the same frequency as it uses terms that are critical of conservatives.  That is, “left wing” should be used as frequently as “right wing,” “far left” should be used as frequently as “far right,” and “atheist left” should be used as frequently as “religious right.”  Based on this premise, do a Google search and here’s what you’ll come up with:

  • The term “right wing” scored 39,700,000 million hits, which is 68.9% more than the 23,500,000 hits scored by “left wing.”
  • The “religious right” brought more than 4,190,000 hits, while the “atheist left” – the only comparable term I could come up with for the liberal equivalent – brought in a meager 11,700 hits.
  • “Far right” had 16,400,000 hits, while “far left” had 10,600,000 hits.

Hillary Clinton claimed a “vast right-wing conspiracy,” and that wording still gets 2,030,000 hits.  Meanwhile, “vast left-wing conspiracy” gets 169,000 hits.  Maybe that phrase should be used more often.

Comments

Media bias

Nice article. Well written. Most liberals won’t read it, as they tend to not acknowledge when they are exposed as unfair or biased. Although today, I think more liberals are proud to be “progressive” (PC word meaning flaming liberal) and are coming out of the closet. That’s good, because we should all know who the anti-free market, anti-capitalism, anti-small government people are.

Media bias

Thanks for your comment.

I may disagree with most stands taken by "progressives," but at least they take a stand and typically have some passion about it.

On the other hand, I wonder how many more years of Keynesian economics and quantitative easing we're going to have to endure before they realize that massive government spending doesn't solve problems -- it creates them.

Dave

 

 

Nice! Just wanted to respond.

Nice! Just wanted to respond. I thoroughly loved your post. Keep up the great work on www.kowal.com .

Post new comment

CAPTCHA
For spam protection, please fill out image capture form:
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.