Political leanings or affiliation of media sources

Any newspaper worth reading should clearly distinguish between news reporting and editorial comment. The fact that so many papers let their editorial agenda influence their news coverage makes them no better than propaganda sheets.

At the same time it's easier to parse clearly subjective reporting than obstensively objective reporting but which is nonetheless subjective through omission. Not that the former is better than the latter, just easier take with grains of salt.

With the full realization that this thread ran it's course back on the 6th, I am wondering if FISHIN would mind saying a word or two in defense of his thought that the Chicago Tribune is a Left of Center newspaper.

Personally, I think of it as being centrist paper as a ploy to sell more papers to a centrist population, while being, at heart, well to the right of center.

I applaud the effort to breakdown the old liberal/conservative categories of political thought. They are not as effective or meaningful as they once were. There are still real issues and different views on those issues. No matter how you slice and dice the parties and the ideas, I don't think I'll ever be voting for Bush.

I do not agree that Ha'Aretz belongs to political center. This edition is the most left-wing and anti-patriotic in all the mainstream Israeli media (I do not take into account leaflets of different movements like "Peace Now" and the like). This might be OK if the newspaper was published somewhere in Switzerland or Belgium. But Israel is the country that is in process of war where physical survival of all the population is at stake.
The political center is represented in Israel by "Ma'ariv" and "Yedioth Achronoth", but these newspapers are unfamiliar to non-Israelis since they lack English version. "Jerusalem Post" is really a right-wing edition.
Most of the Russian language Israeli media are right-to-center.

I listed it as left of center. I don't share your view about its patriotism but agree that it is dove/left.

I think they often show a bit of sanity in an insane conflict (when they aren't being dovish to a fault).

Re: Political leanings or affiliation of media sources
Hey I'm interested in UK papers. Does anybody know the political leanings of English papers like Times, Independent, The Sun, Mirror, etc?

You are a bit confused, because you are failing to seperate a newspaper or TV network's "news" content from its "opinion" content. A mjority of newspapers rely heavily of on group sources like AP and UPI for their news columns. Independent studies have indicated that they both lean to the left. Newspapers also use their own staff reporters, however. These tend to conform with the political opinions of the editor, who is often (but not always also an owner of the pupblication). This is not always the case however. The Wall Street Journal, for example, which may be the most respected newspaper, has a conservative editorial staff, and a liberal reporting staff.
The New York Times, on the other hand, has had recent scandals with liberal reporters fabricating stories to further a political agenda, or to help their own careers.

In general, the editorial staffs of major newspapers run like this:
New York Times: Left
Wall Street Journal: Right
Washington Post: Left
Washington Times: Right
Boston Globe: Left
Boston Herald: Right
Chicago Tribune: Right
Chicago Sun Times: Left
LA Times: Left
San Francisco Chronicle: VERY Left
Minneapolis Star Tribune: VERY Left
Jewish World Review: Right
Arizona Republic: was Right - Has moved towards the center
NY Post: Right
NY Daily News: Left
NY had a conservative non-tabloid, the NY Sun, but it folded about a year ago.

A word about the NY Daily News: It is run occasionally by its owner, Mort Zuckerman, who is a political conservative. From time to time, he writes the editorial. It is obvious when he does so, becuase it seems out of place in a liberal paper. For instance, the Daily News endorsed George Bush both times he ran for president. In general, however, the Daily News tows the liberal line, and runs regular columns from hard-core liberals like Richard Cohen (who also writes for the Washington Post).
The NY Times also has some questionable regular columnists like Maureen Dowd. Dowd's columns are filled with immature liberal ranting, which makes me lost respect for the paper as a whole. I would feel the same way about a conservative paper that ran an Ann Coulter Column. As you may have guessed, I lean center right, but I'm trying to give a fair opinion about this.

The TV Stations are the same way. None of them are "news" stations in the prime-time hours. On the opinion shows, Fox leans right, CNN leans left. MSNBC makes a point of openly leaning WAY left. Fox and CNN invite on respected liberal and conservative opinion makers respectively. MSNBC seems to invite a liberal on so three or four liberals can beat up on him at the same time.
During the rest of the day, all three channels attempt to offer independant news coverage. Of course, what that cover or do not cover is subject to the preferrences of the production managers. CNN and MSNBC are far more likely to spend a lot of time on the latest Sara Palin scandal. Fox will spend hours on Catholics protesting Obama at Notre Dame. That being said, independant sources repeatedly proclaim that Fox has the most independant news converage.

Take that with a grain of salt however. The only way to figure out for yourself what's REALLY going on in the world is to get your news from more than one source, and more than one perspective. And you can skip MSNBC, unless your goal is to become a devoted leftist. Personally I wouldn't trust any news source with such an open agenda. It would stand to reason that they had to be lying to me at least part of the time.

I read the Wall Street Journal on the train every morning, and I read the Post and the News on the way home for the sports. I switch back and forth between CNN and Fox in the evenings. I am suprised how often I find myself agreeing with the liberal guy on Fox and the conservative on CNN.

You are a bit confused, because you are failing to seperate a newspaper or TV network's "news" content from its "opinion" content. A mjority of newspapers rely heavily of on group sources like AP and UPI for their news columns. Independent studies have indicated that they both lean to the left. Newspapers also use their own staff reporters, however. These tend to conform with the political opinions of the editor, who is often (but not always also an owner of the pupblication). This is not always the case however. The Wall Street Journal, for example, which may be the most respected newspaper, has a conservative editorial staff, and a liberal reporting staff.
The New York Times, on the other hand, has had recent scandals with liberal reporters fabricating stories to further a political agenda, or to help their own careers.

In general, the editorial staffs of major newspapers run like this:
New York Times: Left
Wall Street Journal: Right
Washington Post: Left
Washington Times: Right
Boston Globe: Left
Boston Herald: Right
Chicago Tribune: Right
Chicago Sun Times: Left
LA Times: Left
San Francisco Chronicle: VERY Left
Minneapolis Star Tribune: VERY Left
Jewish World Review: Right
Arizona Republic: was Right - Has moved towards the center
NY Post: Right
NY Daily News: Left
NY had a conservative non-tabloid, the NY Sun, but it folded about a year ago.

A word about the NY Daily News: It is run occasionally by its owner, Mort Zuckerman, who is a political conservative. From time to time, he writes the editorial. It is obvious when he does so, becuase it seems out of place in a liberal paper. For instance, the Daily News endorsed George Bush both times he ran for president. In general, however, the Daily News tows the liberal line, and runs regular columns from hard-core liberals like Richard Cohen (who also writes for the Washington Post).
The NY Times also has some questionable regular columnists like Maureen Dowd. Dowd's columns are filled with immature liberal ranting, which makes me lost respect for the paper as a whole. I would feel the same way about a conservative paper that ran an Ann Coulter Column. As you may have guessed, I lean center right, but I'm trying to give a fair opinion about this.

The TV Stations are the same way. None of them are "news" stations in the prime-time hours. On the opinion shows, Fox leans right, CNN leans left. MSNBC makes a point of openly leaning WAY left. Fox and CNN invite on respected liberal and conservative opinion makers respectively. MSNBC seems to invite a liberal on so three or four liberals can beat up on him at the same time.
During the rest of the day, all three channels attempt to offer independant news coverage. Of course, what that cover or do not cover is subject to the preferrences of the production managers. CNN and MSNBC are far more likely to spend a lot of time on the latest Sara Palin scandal. Fox will spend hours on Catholics protesting Obama at Notre Dame. That being said, independant sources repeatedly proclaim that Fox has the most independant news converage.

Take that with a grain of salt however. The only way to figure out for yourself what's REALLY going on in the world is to get your news from more than one source, and more than one perspective. And you can skip MSNBC, unless your goal is to become a devoted leftist. Personally I wouldn't trust any news source with such an open agenda. It would stand to reason that they had to be lying to me at least part of the time.

I read the Wall Street Journal on the train every morning, and I read the Post and the News on the way home for the sports. I switch back and forth between CNN and Fox in the evenings. I am suprised how often I find myself agreeing with the liberal guy on Fox and the conservative on CNN.

Yeah, it was pretty obvious you lean right. I lean left but I agree about Dowd and have made the comparison to Coulter myself recently. However I still occasionally read the NY Times as it has some of the best writing in journalism.

Welcome to a2k.

I liked this thread, glad to see it revive (thanks, mbs).

I'd really appreciate a take, or two or three, on european newspapers. I was also interested to reread about ehBeth's father's reading of middle eastern media, wouldn't mind some links. Yes, I know I can google, but I'd more like to see what a2k folk have to say.
As long as we're at it, I'd read more about south america if I had a clue where to look.

I liked this thread, glad to see it revive (thanks, mbs).

I'd appreciate a take, or two or three, on european newspapers. I was also interested to reread about ehBeth's father's reading of middle eastern media, wouldn't mind some links. Yes, I know I can google, but I'd like to see what a2k folk have to say, not to sway me, but, eh, to give me a clue.
As long as we're at it, I'd read more about south america if I had a clue where to look.

heh, heh,... he's sort of like perez hilton gone butch or something.

i agree with ya soz. generally the friends that have brought drudgey stuff to me have tended to be a little to the right of center. but not quite to rushland.

So I'm embarrassed by the double post.


Remaining interested in takes on different news outlets.. whether by owners or by staff

What are the political leanings of the newspapers in Phoenix, Flagstaff, Mesa, Scottsdale and Yuma? Is there a site that will provide this info?