FAIR did a study on C-SPAN's "Washington Journal," proved its bias

[DemBones DemBones]

"Failing at Its "No. 1 Goal"
Lack of balance at C-SPAN’s Washington Journal"

was published in November-December 2005


We've always known what the study shows but FAIR did actual counts.

The study found that during the eix-month study period, partisan guests were 65% Republican, 34% Democratic, and NO members of any other party were guests on WJ.


An excerpt from the article:


Elected officials who appeared on Washington Journal were slightly more balanced than overall partisan guests. Of the 97 elected officials appearing on the show (senators and House members), 58 were Republican and 39 were Democrat—a 60 to 40 percent imbalance in favor of the GOP.

One might reasonably expect Republicans to moderately outnumber Democrats at a time when the GOP controls the White House and both houses of Congress, but a nearly two to one advantage is hard to justify—particularly in the wake of the national election that concluded in the first week of the study period with the Republican candidate receiving 51 percent of the popular vote. That election gave the Republicans control of 53 percent of the House and 55 percent of the Senate.

Journalists accounted for nearly a third of all guests (215, or 32 percent), the largest single occupational group on Washington Journal’s guestlist. The establishment-oriented Washington Post, with 20 journalists appearing as guests, was the most visible outlet, followed by the Capitol Hill–focused Congressional Quarterly with 12 and the right-leaning Washington Times with 10. USA Today and Time each provided eight guests, while five represented the Christian Science Monitor.

When opinion journalists from all outlets were included, the right-leaning bias was nearly as strong: 32 right-of-center journalists appeared, vs. 19 left-of-center reporters (even counting editor Peter Beinart, the New Republic’s pro-war editor, as being on the left). Perhaps this tilt to the right could be rationalized if right-wing magazines were distinctly more popular than their counterparts on the left, but the reverse seems to be true; Mother Jones and The Nation both best National Review’s circulation numbers by a wide margin, and The Progressive outsells the Weekly Standard and American Spectator.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2764

C-SPAN needs to clean up its act on "Washington Journal." I'd like to see FAIR study how calls to the show are treated as well. This morning I watched WJ for the first time in months. The first call that came in was on the Democratic line and the caller started off saying "I'm a Democrat, a registered Democrat, but I haven't voted for a Democrat in years." Did the host cut him off and tell him to call back on the Independent line? Of course not, she allowed him to make his anti-Democratic comments and then she took the next call from the GOP line!!! That's when I switched channels.

:grr:

[Immad2]

1. Great article, thanks for the link.

[DemBones DemBones]

2. Glad you liked it, hope others will read it, too.

It's just proof of what we all knew but it's nice to have your beliefs confirmed by facts.

C-SPAN provides excellent coverage of the House and Senate and many other events, including protest marches, but "Washington Journal" has gotten to be like watching FOX News. I e-mailed them this morning with this link and an example of something the host did this morning.

[Skittles]

3. I quit watching Washington Journal

there is something eerie about the bush callers who just fawn all over him, no misgivings; I think they are scripted and possibly paid callers.