MEDIA AND JOURNALISM

Media and Journalism

The Liberal Media Myth Revisited: An Examination of Factors Influencing Perceptions of Media Bias.

Introduction

The American Heritage Dictionary defines bias as “a preference or an inclination” that “inhibits impartial judgment,” or “an act or policy stemming from prejudice” (Pickett et al., 2002, p. 138). In the context of news reporting, a bias is the opposite of accuracy, balance, and fairness (Fico et al., 1994; Fico & Soffin, 1995, Lacy, Fico, & Simon, 1991; Simon, Fico, & Lacy, 1989; Streckfuss, 1990). According to these scholars, accuracy means not going beyond the facts of the matter, and balance plays out through giving roughly equal amount of coverage to all involved parties.

Fairness is achieved when all involved parties' perspectives are represented, and no more favorable treatment of any side—either qualitatively or quantitatively—exists. Therefore, fairness reveals itself as a form of balance. For the purpose of this study, a bias in the news media is defined as any form of preferential and unbalanced treatment, or favoritism, toward a political or social issue (e.g., pro-choice or pro-life) or political party (Democratic or Republican). Bias, theoretically, can be prevented by remaining impartial and unprejudiced, which is the norm in the journalism profession in the United States (Black et al., 1999; Goodwin & Smith, 1994; Knowlton & Parsons, 1994; Merrill, 1997; Mindich, 1998). A number of scholars have taken an innovative approach—hostile media perception research—to investigate why audiences perceive media bias. These researchers have discovered that supporters of political groups or issues perceive the media as being unfair or even hostile to their own cause while favoring their opponents (Beck, 1991; Dalton et al., 1998; Gunther, 1992; Gunther & Chia, 2001; Mason & Nass, 1989; Perloff, 1989).

Most studies in this line of research have one thing in common: two groups surrounding a single issue—such as Middle East conflicts, primate research, or a UPS strike—tend to believe the media unfairly favor the other side (Christen, Kannaovakun, & Gunther, 1998; Giner-Sorolla & Chaiken, 1994; Gunther et al., 2001; Hastorf & Cantril, 1954; Perloff, 1989; Vallone et al., 1985). Not surprisingly, participants in these studies think the media unfairly favor their opponents. A related study testing the third-person effect also reported that respondents believed that biased media coverage may sway neutral observers toward the other side (Perloff, Lee/THE LIBERAL MEDIA MYTH 45 1989). Another characteristic of hostile media research, as pointed out by Gunther (1988, 1992), is that the level of observers' self-involvement with an issue or group is likely to determine their views on whether media coverage is credible or biased. In other words, attitude extremity affects trust in media.

Background of the paper

Whether the news media have a liberal bias has interested politicians, journalists, scholars, and the public. Many seem to believe that a political bias exists. According to a recent survey by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press (2002), 47% of those who answered a question on media bias believed news organizations in general are politically biased ...