Why is FOX news conservative?

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Andyb23

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Amused
Fox is no more conservatively biased than the other news channels are liberally biased. In fact, I would say less.

I can turn on Fox News at any hour of the day and find some pretty bad conservative bias within 15 minutes.

I'm not really sure the same could be said for the other cable news networks.

O'Reilly and Hannity may technically be commentary, but within the framework of the network, they're presented as news reporters.

you are so used to liberal bias in the media (or you're a biased liberal) that when you hear anything right of left (i.e. MIDDLE) you automatically think it's "conservative" when it really may be unbiased.

You could turn that around and use it in an opposite matter its circular logic.

last time i checked, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, CNBC, Healine News, PBS all are pretty much liberally biased (and they admit it)

still waiting for some examples...

there's the dan rather thing, but it seems worth mentioning that he got fired.

edit: for the record, I wouldn't consider myself a leftists... hell, I voted for Bush. I just don't see the bias in other cable news networks like I see it in Fox.

 

[loup garou]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Andyb23

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Amused
Fox is no more conservatively biased than the other news channels are liberally biased. In fact, I would say less.

I can turn on Fox News at any hour of the day and find some pretty bad conservative bias within 15 minutes.

I'm not really sure the same could be said for the other cable news networks.

O'Reilly and Hannity may technically be commentary, but within the framework of the network, they're presented as news reporters.

you are so used to liberal bias in the media (or you're a biased liberal) that when you hear anything right of left (i.e. MIDDLE) you automatically think it's "conservative" when it really may be unbiased.

You could turn that around and use it in an opposite matter its circular logic.

last time i checked, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, CNBC, Healine News, PBS all are pretty much liberally biased (and they admit it)

still waiting for some examples...

there's the dan rather thing, but it seems worth mentioning that he got fired.

Damn Masterpiece Theatre always shoving its liberal fruity movies down our throats. :|

 

[mercanucaribe]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Amused
Fox is no more conservatively biased than the other news channels are liberally biased. In fact, I would say less.

I can turn on Fox News at any hour of the day and find some pretty bad conservative bias within 15 minutes.

I'm not really sure the same could be said for the other cable news networks.

O'Reilly and Hannity may technically be commentary, but within the framework of the network, they're presented as news reporters.

you are so used to liberal bias in the media (or you're a biased liberal) that when you hear anything right of left (i.e. MIDDLE) you automatically think it's "conservative" when it really may be unbiased.

Fox News is definately right of center.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Andyb23

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Amused
Fox is no more conservatively biased than the other news channels are liberally biased. In fact, I would say less.

I can turn on Fox News at any hour of the day and find some pretty bad conservative bias within 15 minutes.

I'm not really sure the same could be said for the other cable news networks.

O'Reilly and Hannity may technically be commentary, but within the framework of the network, they're presented as news reporters.

you are so used to liberal bias in the media (or you're a biased liberal) that when you hear anything right of left (i.e. MIDDLE) you automatically think it's "conservative" when it really may be unbiased.

You could turn that around and use it in an opposite matter its circular logic.

last time i checked, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, CNBC, Healine News, PBS all are pretty much liberally biased (and they admit it)

still waiting for some examples...

there's the dan rather thing, but it seems worth mentioning that he got fired.

edit: for the record, I wouldn't consider myself a leftists... hell, I voted for Bush. I just don't see the bias in other cable news networks like I see it in Fox.

This website does a thorough job of catching liberal media bias.

Plus, you're a known ATOT liberal, your views aren't going to be changed.

 

[Andyb23]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Andyb23

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Amused
Fox is no more conservatively biased than the other news channels are liberally biased. In fact, I would say less.

I can turn on Fox News at any hour of the day and find some pretty bad conservative bias within 15 minutes.

I'm not really sure the same could be said for the other cable news networks.

O'Reilly and Hannity may technically be commentary, but within the framework of the network, they're presented as news reporters.

you are so used to liberal bias in the media (or you're a biased liberal) that when you hear anything right of left (i.e. MIDDLE) you automatically think it's "conservative" when it really may be unbiased.

You could turn that around and use it in an opposite matter its circular logic.

last time i checked, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, CNBC, Healine News, PBS all are pretty much liberally biased (and they admit it)

still waiting for some examples...

there's the dan rather thing, but it seems worth mentioning that he got fired.

edit: for the record, I wouldn't consider myself a leftists... hell, I voted for Bush. I just don't see the bias in other cable news networks like I see it in Fox.

This website does a thorough job of catching liberal media bias.

Plus, you're a known ATOT liberal, your views aren't going to be changed.

LOL - on the sidebar of that page -

"Oil Painting of Ronald Reagan the perfect Christmas gift"

Give me a break that site is a crock.

Obviously you can't come up with any real evidence so you just need to use hearsay.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Heifetz
Why is FOX news conservative?

Two words -- Rupert Murdoch.

"Outfoxed" examines how media empires, led by Rupert Murdoch's Fox News, have been running a "race to the bottom" in television news. This film provides an in-depth look at Fox News and the dangers of ever-enlarging corporations taking control of the public's right to know.

The film explores Murdoch's burgeoning kingdom and the impact on society when a broad swath of media is controlled by one person.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Heifetz
It's obvious that FOX news has a conservative bias. Why is that? Is it a business decision to get a conservative audience and to stand out from the other news networks, or is Murdock and every FOX news manager die hard conservatives who want to get their views across?

Probably Niche Marketing, but then again, maybe not.

 

[fskimospy]

One word: Marketing

Back in the day when you only had a few channels, the nightly newscasts would toe a very middle of the road approach in an attempt to appeal to as many viewers as possible. Network news on CBS/NBC/ABC still does this to a very large extent.

With hundreds of channels available now though, instead of trying to cast a wide net... the shows/channels target specific audiences. FOX specifically targets conservatives and those who buy into the "liberal media" myth. This is why you have the american flag waving everywhere on the channel, it's why they have no leftist based shows on their channel, it is why the anchor of their nightly news program is a hard right wing pundit. This is all on purpose, and it's not to change the world so the republicans can take over, it is that they have found there is an audience that wants to hear this sort of news.

I don't blame them though, they are doing it to make money. Most people are guilty of the same thing. I bet you seek out "news" and commentary sites that reinforce your own opinions. I bet those on the left watch the daily show and find it hilarious (that show rocks, but is definitely leftist), and don't watch Sean Hannity. Sure FOX news is full of right wing bias, but the people that watch it would find other sources anyway... and that's okay. We're all guilty of it.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: JS80
Plus, you're a known ATOT liberal, your views aren't going to be changed.

so what are the lottory numbers for next week?

 

[Mean MrMustard]

Fox News isn't conservatively biased.

It's REPUBLICAN biased. There's NOTHING conservative about the Republican party.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
One word: Marketing

Back in the day when you only had a few channels, the nightly newscasts would toe a very middle of the road approach in an attempt to appeal to as many viewers as possible. Network news on CBS/NBC/ABC still does this to a very large extent.

With hundreds of channels available now though, instead of trying to cast a wide net... the shows/channels target specific audiences. FOX specifically targets conservatives and those who buy into the "liberal media" myth. This is why you have the american flag waving everywhere on the channel, it's why they have no leftist based shows on their channel, it is why the anchor of their nightly news program is a hard right wing pundit. This is all on purpose, and it's not to change the world so the republicans can take over, it is that they have found there is an audience that wants to hear this sort of news.

I don't blame them though, they are doing it to make money. Most people are guilty of the same thing. I bet you seek out "news" and commentary sites that reinforce your own opinions. I bet those on the left watch the daily show and find it hilarious (that show rocks, but is definitely leftist), and don't watch Sean Hannity. Sure FOX news is full of right wing bias, but the people that watch it would find other sources anyway... and that's okay. We're all guilty of it.

True, but add the Colbert Report as well. It is equally "Leftist", just in a different way. However, neither attempts to be News shows, but Comedy shows using the News as a source of material.

 

[Healey]

A recent study from UCLA looked in depth at media bias. The findings were pretty interesting.

Check out the short summation.

If you have the time, the entire report is avail here.

In a nutshell, here are a few findings:
"Of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center.."

"The fourth most centrist outlet was "Special Report With Brit Hume" on Fox News, which often is cited by liberals as an egregious example of a right-wing outlet. While this news program proved to be right of center, the study found ABC's "World News Tonight" and NBC's "Nightly News" to be left of center. All three outlets were approximately equidistant from the center, the report found."

 

[Craig234]

This comes up a lot, here's the short version.

The right-wing cabal has made a concerted effort for decades to build a media machine.

Others have linked to the history of Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch.

For a solid analysis of the issue showing that the facts are the media is right-wing, not left-wing, read Eric Alterman's What Liberal Media?

Here's an article by him:

Eric Alterman article on the left-wing media myth

The right does what's called gaming the ref; it can also be called the big lie technique, repeating something until it's believed.

Be constantly saying the media is liberal, people begin to think there must be something to the claim. Then, whenever any comment is not right wing, they say, "oh, see!"

There's a lot of money behind the right-wing media machine from people like Richard Mellon Scaife.

One other great book exposing the facts iss David Brock's "The right-wing media noise machine".

However, I've yet to meet *one* single right winger who had read or would read either of those books. Ignorance is bliss, they say.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Healey
A recent study from UCLA looked in depth at media bias. The findings were pretty interesting.

Check out the short summation.

If you have the time, the entire report is avail here.

In a nutshell, here are a few findings:
"Of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center.."

"The fourth most centrist outlet was "Special Report With Brit Hume" on Fox News, which often is cited by liberals as an egregious example of a right-wing outlet. While this news program proved to be right of center, the study found ABC's "World News Tonight" and NBC's "Nightly News" to be left of center. All three outlets were approximately equidistant from the center, the report found."

That is an enormously flawed study. They aren't measuring "bias", what they are measuring is how far from the "center" their coverage is. But aren't those the same thing? Maybe, if the media's purpose was to be BALANCED, but that is not the same thing as unbiased. The study makes the assumption that the correct, unbiased coverage would cite left and right equally, no matter how factual or intelligent or nonfactual and stupid the various positions are. In other words, a NYT story that cited a liberal think tank report that the moon was made of rock would be labeled as liberally biased, while a Washington Times story that cited a conservative think tank report that the moon was made of candy would be labeled (equally) as conservative bias. Now I'm no UCLA political science professor, but that seems like a pretty UNscientific approach, based largely on a misunderstanding of what the word "bias" means.

 

[Healey]

Originally posted by: Craig234
This comes up a lot, here's the short version.

The right-wing cabal has made a concerted effort for decades to build a media machine.

Others have linked to the history of Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch.

For a solid analysis of the issue showing that the facts are the media is right-wing, not left-wing, read Eric Alterman's What Liberal Media?

Here's an article by him:

Eric Alterman article on the left-wing media myth

The right does what's called gaming the ref; it can also be called the big lie technique, repeating something until it's believed.

Be constantly saying the media is liberal, people begin to think there must be something to the claim. Then, whenever any comment is not right wing, they say, "oh, see!"

There's a lot of money behind the right-wing media machine from people like Richard Mellon Scaife.

One other great book exposing the facts iss David Brock's "The right-wing media noise machine".

However, I've yet to meet *one* single right winger who had read or would read either of those books. Ignorance is bliss, they say.

Sound like good reads, if I wanted another person's opinion I might check 'em out. In the meantime how about looking at the report links I posted? The report is done by 2 UCLA professors who admit that they're left wing, but worked hard to eliminate any bias from their 10 research project.

As previously mentioned, they study found that 18 of the 20 media they tracked showed a left leaning bias. Some, like CBS news, have a strong bias, while others, like WSJ and NBC news, just a little bit of bias.

But then again I'm sure their self funded, 10 year, peer reviewed, report is just hogwash, unlike Alterman and Brock.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Craig234
This comes up a lot, here's the short version.

The right-wing cabal has made a concerted effort for decades to build a media machine.

Others have linked to the history of Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch.

For a solid analysis of the issue showing that the facts are the media is right-wing, not left-wing, read Eric Alterman's What Liberal Media?

Here's an article by him:

Eric Alterman article on the left-wing media myth

The right does what's called gaming the ref; it can also be called the big lie technique, repeating something until it's believed.

Be constantly saying the media is liberal, people begin to think there must be something to the claim. Then, whenever any comment is not right wing, they say, "oh, see!"

There's a lot of money behind the right-wing media machine from people like Richard Mellon Scaife.

One other great book exposing the facts iss David Brock's "The right-wing media noise machine".

However, I've yet to meet *one* single right winger who had read or would read either of those books. Ignorance is bliss, they say.

A key part of making the big lie technique work is making it something people WANT to believe. It's obviously easier for right wingers to believe that the news is NOT factually composed and is really part of some plan to undermine their position. They have all these "truths" that unfortunately conflict quite often with reality. Rather than questioning their truth, it's much easier to just tell people that the group presenting the conflicting evidence is biased against them. Now it's no longer necessary to even argue anything on a factual basis, the media is biased, so anything that doesn't fit with the right-wing worldview must not be true. It's enormously easier on the conservatives, which makes the fantasy of a liberal media much more appealing than it otherwise would be.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Healey
A recent study from UCLA looked in depth at media bias. The findings were pretty interesting.

Check out the short summation.

If you have the time, the entire report is avail here.

In a nutshell, here are a few findings:
"Of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center.."

"The fourth most centrist outlet was "Special Report With Brit Hume" on Fox News, which often is cited by liberals as an egregious example of a right-wing outlet. While this news program proved to be right of center, the study found ABC's "World News Tonight" and NBC's "Nightly News" to be left of center. All three outlets were approximately equidistant from the center, the report found."

Excellent study. Surpising that it came from UCLA. It really nails home what many/most people are already aware of.

If you really listen to how issues are presented the liberal bias becomes very, very strikingly clear. Coupled with the fact that most journalists are liberal (I mean, it is a liberal arts major, right?) this "commons sense" makes perfect sense.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Healey

Originally posted by: Craig234
This comes up a lot, here's the short version.

The right-wing cabal has made a concerted effort for decades to build a media machine.

Others have linked to the history of Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch.

For a solid analysis of the issue showing that the facts are the media is right-wing, not left-wing, read Eric Alterman's What Liberal Media?

Here's an article by him:

Eric Alterman article on the left-wing media myth

The right does what's called gaming the ref; it can also be called the big lie technique, repeating something until it's believed.

Be constantly saying the media is liberal, people begin to think there must be something to the claim. Then, whenever any comment is not right wing, they say, "oh, see!"

There's a lot of money behind the right-wing media machine from people like Richard Mellon Scaife.

One other great book exposing the facts iss David Brock's "The right-wing media noise machine".

However, I've yet to meet *one* single right winger who had read or would read either of those books. Ignorance is bliss, they say.

Sound like good reads, if I wanted another person's opinion I might check 'em out. In the meantime how about looking at the report links I posted? The report is done by 2 UCLA professors who admit that they're left wing, but worked hard to eliminate any bias from their 10 research project.

As previously mentioned, they study found that 18 of the 20 media they tracked showed a left leaning bias. Some, like CBS news, have a strong bias, while others, like WSJ and NBC news, just a little bit of bias.

But then again I'm sure their self funded, 10 year, peer reviewed, report is just hogwash, unlike Alterman and Brock.

Maybe they should have spent less time "eliminating bias" and more time using their damn brains. Political science is science in the same way that a golf cart is a race car, but there is no excuse for that kind of stupidity. Hell, their study could equally as truthfully be used to prove that left-wing thinktanks and politicians are more factually accurate than their right-wing counterparts. The reason this works is that these two geniuses decided to base their conclusion on the assumption of non-bias of the average, WITHOUT attempting to prove that assumption. It's a mistake a first year science student would be embarrassed to make.

 

[Healey]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Healey
A recent study from UCLA looked in depth at media bias. The findings were pretty interesting.

Check out the short summation.

If you have the time, the entire report is avail here.

In a nutshell, here are a few findings:
"Of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center.."

"The fourth most centrist outlet was "Special Report With Brit Hume" on Fox News, which often is cited by liberals as an egregious example of a right-wing outlet. While this news program proved to be right of center, the study found ABC's "World News Tonight" and NBC's "Nightly News" to be left of center. All three outlets were approximately equidistant from the center, the report found."

That is an enormously flawed study. They aren't measuring "bias", what they are measuring is how far from the "center" their coverage is. But aren't those the same thing? Maybe, if the media's purpose was to be BALANCED, but that is not the same thing as unbiased. The study makes the assumption that the correct, unbiased coverage would cite left and right equally, no matter how factual or intelligent or nonfactual and stupid the various positions are. In other words, a NYT story that cited a liberal think tank report that the moon was made of rock would be labeled as liberally biased, while a Washington Times story that cited a conservative think tank report that the moon was made of candy would be labeled (equally) as conservative bias. Now I'm no UCLA political science professor, but that seems like a pretty UNscientific approach, based largely on a misunderstanding of what the word "bias" means.

Good points. But then it's near impossible to quantify "bias." This reports just looks at one metric.

Another measurement is how many journalists will identify how they vote. Time after time those surveys show that better than 80% admit to voting Democratic.

Having personally worked in large market and network news for over 20 years I can add my observations. It's not like we'd sit in the moring editorial meeting and ask "How can we slant this story?" It's that we all talked to each other, read the same magazines, went to the same schools, partied with the same people, saw the world through the same glasses, and shared the same group think.

Was there intentinal bias? Some. Was there inherent bias? Of course.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Healey
A recent study from UCLA looked in depth at media bias. The findings were pretty interesting.

Check out the short summation.

If you have the time, the entire report is avail here.

In a nutshell, here are a few findings:
"Of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center.."

"The fourth most centrist outlet was "Special Report With Brit Hume" on Fox News, which often is cited by liberals as an egregious example of a right-wing outlet. While this news program proved to be right of center, the study found ABC's "World News Tonight" and NBC's "Nightly News" to be left of center. All three outlets were approximately equidistant from the center, the report found."

Excellent study. Surpising that it came from UCLA. It really nails home what many/most people are already aware of.

If you really listen to how issues are presented the liberal bias becomes very, very strikingly clear. Coupled with the fact that most journalists are liberal (I mean, it is a liberal arts major, right?) this "commons sense" makes perfect sense.

What does "being liberal" as an individual have to do with being liberally biased in your job?

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Healey

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Healey
A recent study from UCLA looked in depth at media bias. The findings were pretty interesting.

Check out the short summation.

If you have the time, the entire report is avail here.

In a nutshell, here are a few findings:
"Of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center.."

"The fourth most centrist outlet was "Special Report With Brit Hume" on Fox News, which often is cited by liberals as an egregious example of a right-wing outlet. While this news program proved to be right of center, the study found ABC's "World News Tonight" and NBC's "Nightly News" to be left of center. All three outlets were approximately equidistant from the center, the report found."

That is an enormously flawed study. They aren't measuring "bias", what they are measuring is how far from the "center" their coverage is. But aren't those the same thing? Maybe, if the media's purpose was to be BALANCED, but that is not the same thing as unbiased. The study makes the assumption that the correct, unbiased coverage would cite left and right equally, no matter how factual or intelligent or nonfactual and stupid the various positions are. In other words, a NYT story that cited a liberal think tank report that the moon was made of rock would be labeled as liberally biased, while a Washington Times story that cited a conservative think tank report that the moon was made of candy would be labeled (equally) as conservative bias. Now I'm no UCLA political science professor, but that seems like a pretty UNscientific approach, based largely on a misunderstanding of what the word "bias" means.

Good points. But then it's near impossible to quantify "bias." This reports just looks at one metric.

Another measurement is how many journalists will identify how they vote. Time after time those surveys show that better than 80% admit to voting Democratic.

That's not a valid argument...it doesn't prove intentional bias unless you can prove that journalists are unable to put aside their political views when covering a story.

Having personally worked in large market and network news for over 20 years I can add my observations. It's not like we'd sit in the moring editorial meeting and ask "How can we slant this story?" It's that we all talked to each other, read the same magazines, went to the same schools, partied with the same people, saw the world through the same glasses, and shared the same group think.

Was there intentinal bias? Some. Was there inherent bias? Of course.

So? I see no proof that "group think" translates into liberal bias. After all, their is a world outside politics that does affect news coverage...and my interaction with journalists has demonstrated that the overriding motivation of most of them is to cover the news as honestly as possible. Does that mean that they are perfect arbiters of "truth"? Of course not, everyone will put something of themselves into their coverage...but that is NOT the liberal bias the right-wingers scream about all the time.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Healey
A recent study from UCLA looked in depth at media bias. The findings were pretty interesting.

Check out the short summation.

If you have the time, the entire report is avail here.

In a nutshell, here are a few findings:
"Of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center.."

"The fourth most centrist outlet was "Special Report With Brit Hume" on Fox News, which often is cited by liberals as an egregious example of a right-wing outlet. While this news program proved to be right of center, the study found ABC's "World News Tonight" and NBC's "Nightly News" to be left of center. All three outlets were approximately equidistant from the center, the report found."

Excellent study. Surpising that it came from UCLA. It really nails home what many/most people are already aware of.

If you really listen to how issues are presented the liberal bias becomes very, very strikingly clear. Coupled with the fact that most journalists are liberal (I mean, it is a liberal arts major, right?) this "commons sense" makes perfect sense.

What does "being liberal" as an individual have to do with being liberally biased in your job?

The same reason people here argue Fox News is bad due to "being conservative". Double standard?

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
What does "being liberal" as an individual have to do with being liberally biased in your job?

Because there are few human beings that can truly seperate their feelings/intuition from their job. You're a sharp guy, you know basic psychology.

 

[Healey]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

What does "being liberal" as an individual have to do with being liberally biased in your job?

If you're reporting on sports, not much. If you're reporting on politics and social issues, plenty.


This is almost 100% subjective, we can argue forever and never agree. I just view things a bit differently because I've had the opportunity to be in the trenches where we'd churn out the stuff day after day. Most of my time was in production as opposed to editorial which gave me the privilege of sitting back and taking the wide view.

But then again it was only my view filtered through my life experiences and personal biases. And of course how I relate those experiences here reflect my biases. Just as a right leaning journalist will present facts as he sees then, and a left leaning journalist will present the same facts from a differing viewpoint.

The entire "neutral journalist" model is pretty much an oxymoron anyway. Everyone paints the scene the way they see it, or want to see it.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Healey
Sound like good reads, if I wanted another person's opinion I might check 'em out. In the meantime how about looking at the report links I posted? The report is done by 2 UCLA professors who admit that they're left wing, but worked hard to eliminate any bias from their 10 research project.

As previously mentioned, they study found that 18 of the 20 media they tracked showed a left leaning bias. Some, like CBS news, have a strong bias, while others, like WSJ and NBC news, just a little bit of bias.

But then again I'm sure their self funded, 10 year, peer reviewed, report is just hogwash, unlike Alterman and Brock.

Your UCLA study is nonsensical misinformation written by two former fellows at conservative 'think tanks' - here's Media Matters' article on the study:

Article on UCLA study

Don't read the books I listed for the opinion, read them for the facts.

I find it pretty shocking you have 20 years in the media and have not read these major books on the topic, especially Alterman's classic.