[pcorsaro]

There's a quote from this article under the Cable Viewership section that I found interesting. "Cable viewership across the three major cable news networks — CNN, Fox News and MSNBC — is, on average, down 19% in prime time for the first half of this year compared to the first half of 2021. Those losses skew heavily toward CNN and MSNBC, which are down 47% and 33%, respectively. Fox's ratings are up 12% in that six-month span."

That's a very weird, biased way of phrasing that. The two left leaning news organizations are down quite a bit, but the right leaning organization is actually up, but we're going to lump them all together and make it look like they're all down at first glance.

[lotsofpulp]

They are back to back sentences. Pretty bad attempt at obfuscating. The first sentence claims data “across” all channels, and the following sentence breaks it down.

[starkd]

But they included Foxnews in the first sentence where they claimed it was down "across the board".

[bee_rider]

Note that "across the board" is not actually a quote here (despite being in quotes).

[spread_love]

No, they said it is down "on average." That is true, and immediately clarified in the following sentence.

[pcorsaro]

The paragraph starts by saying viewership is down across the the three major news networks. That’s not exactly across the board, but means the same thing.

[spread_love]

Cable viewership across the three major cable news networks is, on average, down 19%.

It's specifically not "across the board."

[ohiovr]

If Foxnews and Skynews were down 54% and 33% and CNN was up 19% how would they write it? Still on average? Or those mean right wing news outlets are doing terrible, but the good Left wing CNN is taking up the lead!

[rootusrootus]

That's digging really hard to find a conspiracy. They didn't mince words, in two sentences they gave the full details. All in the same font, same paragraph.

[johncearls]

I think you mean bias, not conspiracy.

[spread_love]

They listed the top 3 cable networks. If Skynews was one of those, presumably it would be included...

[lotsofpulp]

Is that not what across the board means? There are 3 news channels, all of them have to be added together for an across the board measurement.

[DiggyJohnson]

Not at all - in my opinion.

“Across the board” means something closer “true in every case”. Though as I type this, I realize some people my think of it as “in total.”

[bee_rider]

Note that "across the board" does not actually appear in the article.

[DiggyJohnson]

N.b. indeed, cheers

[lotsofpulp]

You are right, that is what across the board means. I was mixing up what the person who replied to me wrote with what I wrote. Oops!

[carbadtraingood]

"Across the board" means "in every instance" not "in aggregate", at least in my experience.

[lotsofpulp]

Yes, that is correct. I was misremembering what I read. It was

“across the three major cable news networks”

Which I paraphrased as

“Across all the channels”

Which the person replying to me changed to

“Across the board”.

[fullshark]

When your team has control -> stick your head in the sand. When the other team has control -> bathe in outrage.

[Grim-444]

Similarly, if your political ideology gets their way, it's a "success of democracy", while if anyone else's ideas get traction, it's the "end of democracy". When, ironically, that very thought pattern is itself the end of democracy.

[quetzthecoatl]

In the same lines : "judicial activism" and "judicial coup".

[landemva]

Outrage over 'populism' in 2016.

[bee_rider]

Where does the bias come in? You would have to stop reading literally mid-paragraph to be mislead.

[computerphage]

Sounds like it comes in the first half of the paragraph then

[pjbeam]

The point of a paragraph is to thread together sentences into meaning beyond that contained in them individually.

[spread_love]

I just started reading A Tale of Two Cities, I assume the book is just about "the best of times."

Otherwise the intro is written with incredible bias.

[bee_rider]

> I just started reading [...] with incredible bias.

wow how could you

[JoshCole]

It? That? The? What are you talking about? It seems hypocritical to imply that meanings ought to be understood divorced from context while your own post doesn't meet the standard.

[bee_rider]

That every given sentence, when extracted from context, should be totally free of bias, is a ridiculous expectation.

[GenerocUsername]

Post title repeats the same 'all together' bias, so it is likely the single strongest sentence in the article despite being wrong when viewed in detail

[tpoacher]

which, to be fair, is what most people do when skimming articles

[not_a_shill]

Whenever the line inevitably gets quoted out of context.

[datalopers]

CNN and MSNBC quote viewership. Fox quotes ratings. Not the same thing.

[jquery]

Hmm, I just noticed that. Can you elucidate the difference?

[ohiovr]

The difference helps CNN look better. Ratings is all that matters to a broadcaster.

[spread_love]

Nielsen reports viewership and ratings for all three networks. I know you're desperate here but at least don't play dumb.

[V__]

From an outside perspective, I always have to chuckle when someone calls CNN, MSNBC left-leaning and FOX right-leaning. One is a full-blown conspiracy-theory right-wing "news" network, and the other two are just regular sensationalized news channels. Does the US even have left-leaning news?

[nsxwolf]

American leftists have always shared the same view as you. The left-leaning news networks are simply straight news, unbiased, doing it right... and everything their ideological opponents watch is far-right propaganda.

[carbadtraingood]

As a leftist who feels the Democratic party is a center-right party, networks like CNN and MSNBC come across as deeply biased but not particularly "left". Maybe Liberal, but certainly not "Left".

[CaptWillard]

Right and left have been rendered almost meaningless, especially in this context.

What is called "left" these days is more, "that which conforms to Democrat narratives" and lately quite illiberal, while pretty much anything else is called "right" or "far-right" even when it's attacking corporations or the military-industrial complex.

[carbadtraingood]

In the States, yes. It's unfortunate, I think, because it lumps together many different (and often opposing) ideologies under one label.

[V__]

This is not my view at all. News can be biased/sensationalized, even when it's neither left nor right. CNN and MSNBC are (as far as I can tell) the tv equivalent of clickbait. They are just (compared to the extremes of FOX) centrist about it. The only thing I would call straight news in the US would be PBS.

[DiggyJohnson]

Which is hilarious because that’s how everyone feels about their particular taste (taste for bias) in their news.

[nsxwolf]

Self-identified conservatives understand that Fox News is intentionally aligned with their ideology.

[DiggyJohnson]

Exactly, that’s a clearer way of wording what I was trying to point out.

[DiggyJohnson]

Yes, I’m sorry if you don’t agree but there’s no reasonable way of characterizing MSNBC other than “left-leaning”.

[carbadtraingood]

Capital L Liberal leaning, maybe. Deeply biased and sensationalist, absolutely. Not particularly leftist.

A Left leaning news source would be much more interested in discussing the demands of workers, pushing for strong labor, nationalization of corporations, etc. When Slavoj Žižek becomes a newscaster somewhere, and the news is talking about how important it is to eliminate landlords then we can talk about left leaning news media.

[DiggyJohnson]

I think your problem then is with the current state of progressive politics in the USA, because the lack of care for labor rights, etc. (you provided a good list) is lacking at every level of society and class. Ask a working class progressive what they care about right now and you probably won’t hear “worker’s rights.”

Obviously the Overton Window works in both directions. All I’m saying is that MSNBC seems to track generally the state of liberal-progressive political discourse, even if it isn’t the left-leaning progressive discourse you’d hope it would be.

Hopefully that makes sense. Appreciate your reply.

[V__]

I would agree with carbadtraingood and your characterization and therefore agree that MSNBC is liberal leaning, which in the US might as well be left-leaning. I think it was a misunderstanding of definitions. Thank you both for your replies.

[DiggyJohnson]

Cheers, and I agree. These sorts of conversations are most valuable in reminding us that these sorts of discussions do not need to devolve to stubborn disagreement. Happy days

[carbadtraingood]

Yeah, that makes sense to me.

I think I probably care more about defining "left" vs "liberal" then most here in the States.

And I'd agree, as much as I want it to be the case that we see more worker solidarity, it's not the thing most Americans seem to think about. Even if they have concerns about current policies. For instance, Americans could call for a general strike as a response to the Roe v Wade decision. But the idea of using worker power in that way seems quite alien here.

[forinti]

From the little I know of US media, I would guess The Young Turks and Democracy Now! are probably the furthest left you can go.

[CaptWillard]

Who told you that? Have you been paying attention the last 6-10 years?

I'm sorry, but the credibility of those networks has completely inverted.

That's not my opinion. The vast majority of media-fueled outrages that were blasted by MSNBC and CNN over the last 6-10 years have proven to be cynical distortions or extrapolation at best, and many times outright fabrication.

Meanwhile, "conspiracy theories" are consistently turning out to be relatively accurate, which is a double whammy as the MSM are the ones telling you they are conspiracy theories.

[corrral]

> I'm sorry, but the credibility of those networks has completely inverted.

When I'm at my parents' house and Fox News is on (as it always is) I can google a pretty high percentage of things they're "covering" and find they're bullshit. The most-used, but not only, tactic is to report something ordinary as if it's new and sinister, omitting all context. They do it constantly.

To be fair, maybe you're right and CNN and MSNBC are even worse. Dunno, I've mostly known people from center-left to far-left (plus a few that defy categorization) in my social circles for most of my life, and none of them have ever thought either network was worth a damn.

[V__]

> That's not my opinion.

That is your opinion. There is no factual basis on which to claim that Fox (which is part of the MSM btw.) is somehow more factual or better news than the rest. This of course doesn't mean that the rest is good, just not as crazy bad.

> "conspiracy theories" are consistently turning out to be relatively accurate

Absolutely.. if you you are part of some right-wing-bubble.

Sincerely, your George Soros sponsored online shill.

[rootusrootus]

> Does the US even have left-leaning news?

Nothing mainstream. The right wing is fond of calling the other side communists, though in reality you could probably fit every actual communist American into a single stadium. America is a right-leaning country, there is no left to speak of.

Though I suppose it might be fair to say that such constructs only really matter within a single political system, so "left" and "right" don't automatically have to be a particular definition.

[DiggyJohnson]

How can you defend MSNBC for being anything other than left-leaning?

It’s not always as progressive as American progressives would like it to be, but not being progressive≠ not left leaning.

[carbadtraingood]

MSNBC fundamentally believes capitalism is good and right. They are absolutely left of the Republican party, but they are hardly left.

This is unfortunately a consequence of the two party system in the States. We equate Democrats with Left and Republicans with Right. Anything supportive of Democrats gets labeled "left" even if the policies are really centrist, pro capital ones. Because we don't really have the language here to differentiate the Left and Democrats in mainstream American parlance.

[DiggyJohnson]

I’m confused, are you saying that any news outlet that doesn’t denounce capitalism isn’t truly left-biased?

I think your perspective is more radical than you realize. You sound like a revolutionary to me, not a progressive.

[techdragon]

This is actually a wider issue with political discussion in countries with two dominant parties. There are parties who frequently use “political description words” such as (regex notation to save on duplicates) “democra.?”, “republic.?”, “liberal”, “labour”, “social.?”, “conservative”, and many more. As a consequence of this people begin to develop associations with certain kinds of political views with the full or shorthand names of the political parties that promote them so we get discussions about “Republican/Labour/Liberal/Democrat/Conservative policies” that grow increasingly divorced (from the terms that are needed to discuss them like “liberal” and “conservative” … which generates confusion.

There are fundamentally, multiple axises upon which you can measure political policy, views, goals, parties, etc. A few examples of widely understood ones being “progressive/conservative”, “authoritarian/libertarian”, “collectivist/anarchist”, and some even cover similar things such as “socialist/capitalist” which has philosophical overlap “collectivist/individualist” but is not the same, being obviously more focused on the economic structures than basic political philosophies of collectivism vs individualism.

All of this is to say that boiling politics down to a simplistic “left/right” spectrum does nothing but confuse the issues.

[orwin]

No, i think he would be OK with mixed economy and more workers rights, as well as more worker-owned companies.

You can like some aspect of capitalism and think some industry/market should be protected from it (like inherently monopolistic markets?)

[corrral]

> Does the US even have left-leaning news?

Democracy Now! (radio)

The Nation (print)

[jquery]

The overwhelming power of rural voters in America forces us to pay respects to a lot of nonsense we could otherwise ignore…

[OrangeMonkey]

Who defines what bias a news organization have, and what defines if that is a good call or a bad call?