I would simply point back to my original statement about people choosing to read and believe that which confirms the predilections they've already formed. I've known people who have stopped reading a particular paper because they were offended to find an article published which offended their cherished belief. I know that is anecdotal, but then, so is the entire body of that opinion. My experience in life, as well as what i've read in history, suggests to me that people seek confirmation in a medium, more so than information.
Setanta - Again, another very good point, but it does not go to my question. What if the person doesn't have a "cherished opinion" on the issue? What if he or she is completely ignorant of the facts? If 75% of the news reporting with which they are likley to come in contact is biased towards a particular view, is it not likely that he or she will come away thinking that view represents a factual treatment of the topic? Spread that effect across such a largely ill-informed electorate and I think it can have a negative impact on the choices people make at the polls.
If you give people incorrect information, they will likely make the wrong choices.
