Examining the "Liberal Media" Claim
FAIR reports what most of us already knew: that 'the media' is economically conservative, while retaining some moderate views on social policies:
When asked about a series of possible economic priorities for the federal government, 56% of journalists saw the need to "reform entitlement programs by slowing the rate of increase in spending for programs like Medicare and Social Security" as "one of the top few" priorities (19% said it should be the single highest priority) (Q#10b). Only 35% of the public felt similarly when polled by Greenberg Research Inc. in November 1996 (just 10% of the public saw this as the single highest priority.).
When asked about a series of possible economic priorities for the federal government, 56% of journalists saw the need to "reform entitlement programs by slowing the rate of increase in spending for programs like Medicare and Social Security" as "one of the top few" priorities (19% said it should be the single highest priority) (Q#10b). Only 35% of the public felt similarly when polled by Greenberg Research Inc. in November 1996 (just 10% of the public saw this as the single highest priority.).
posted by Management at 7:09 PM
1 Comments:
This is G o o g l e's cache of http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2447
1. Political Orientation
One of the basic findings of this survey is that most journalists identify themselves as being centrists on both social and economic issues. Perhaps this is why an earlier survey found that they tended to vote for Bill Clinton in large numbers. Clinton's centrist "new Democrat" orientation combines moderately liberal social policies (which brings criticism from conservative anti-gay, "pro-life" and other activists) with moderately conservative economic policies (which brings criticism from labor unions, welfare rights advocates and others). This orientation fits well with the views expressed by journalists.
2. State of the Economy
The Washington press corps has often been accused of being an "elite" that is out of touch with mainstream Americans. As reported in the methodology section, journalists responding to this survey certainly did have very high household incomes, with over half living in households with $100,000 or more in income, and one-third in households with $150,000 or more income. Perhaps it should come as no surprise, then, that journalists have a much more positive assessment of the state of the economy than the general public (Q#9). Choosing from a list of options, 34% of journalists said they thought economic conditions were "excellent" and another 58% said "good." Only 4% saw it as fair, and 1% rated it "poor."
When pollsters ask the same question of the general publicwhere the benefits of economic growth have fallen unevenlyfar different views are found. A March 1998 Gallup/CNN/USA Today poll discovered that only 20% of the general public see economic conditions as "excellent," while 46% say "good." A full 27% describe it as "only fair" and 7% believe it is "poor."
3. Economic Priorities
When asked about a series of possible economic priorities for the federal government, 56% of journalists saw the need to "reform entitlement programs by slowing the rate of increase in spending for programs like Medicare and Social Security" as "one of the top few" priorities (19% said it should be the single highest priority) (Q#10b). Only 35% of the public felt similarly when polled by Greenberg Research Inc. in November 1996 (just 10% of the public saw this as the single highest priority.).
Instead, 59% of the general public identified the need to "protect Medicare and Social Security against major cuts" as "one of the top few priorities" (a full 24% of the public saw this as the single highest priority). Only 39% of journalists felt the same (with 13% identifying it as the single highest priority) (Q#10a). While 12% of the public put reforming and slowing Social Security and Medicare "toward the bottom of the list," only 4% of journalists did (Q#10b). Journalists' emphasis on slowing entitlements contrasts sharply with the general public's emphasis on protecting entitlements.
When it came to health insurance, 32% of journalists felt that requiring employers provide health insurance to their employees should be "one of the top few priorities," while a larger 47% of the public did (Q#10d).
By far the biggest gap between the public and journalists, though, came with the issue of NAFTA expansion (Q#10c). Of journalists, 24% thought it was among the "top few" priorities to "expand the NAFTA trade agreement to include other countries in Latin America." Only 7% of the general public agreed. Indeed, a whopping 44% of the general publiccompared to just 8% of journalistsput NAFTA expansion "toward the bottom of the list" of priorities.
In these issue areas, the claimed economic centrism of journalists is belied by a series of economic priorities that are actually to the right of the public, and which would bring opposition from groups on the left: labor unions, health care advocates, senior citizen advocates.
...
5. Corporate Power
The general public is more critical of the concentration of corporate power in the United States than are journalists. When asked whether they felt "too much power is concentrated in the hands of a few large companies," 57% of the journalists agreed, while 43% felt they did not have too much power (Q#12). The numbers were quite different, though, when the Times Mirror Center asked the same question of the general public in October 1995. A full 77% of the public felt that corporations had too much power, with only 18% feeling that they did not.
6. Taxes
The centrist orientation of journalists comes through clearly when assessing Clinton's 1993 economic plan which modestly raised tax rates on the wealthy, countering the trend of reduced tax rates that they had enjoyed in previous years (Q#13). Nearly half (49%) of journalists thought this policy was about right, while 14% thought it went too far, and 18% thought it didn't go far enough. In stark contrast, when the public was asked a similar question in an ABC News/Washington Post poll in April 1993, 15% of the general public felt Clinton's policy went too far and a huge 72% felt it didn't go far enough. (10% volunteered that they thought it was about right.) Here again, the relative economic privilege of the Washington press corps may partly explain this contrast with the public.
7. NAFTA and "Fast Track" Authority
Compared to the general public, journalists have a distinctly more positive assessment of NAFTA's impact and are more likely to support granting the President "fast-track" authority to negotiate new trade agreements. 65% of journalists feel that NAFTA has had more of a positive impact on the United States, while only 8% feel it has had more of a negative impact (Q#14). But in a Hart-Teeter/NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll in July 1997, only 32% of the public thought NAFTA's impact was more positive, while 42% felt NAFTA's impact on the country has been more negative.
Perhaps as a result of these differing assessments of NAFTA's impact, journalists are more likely to favor granting "fast track" authority to the President to negotiate new trade agreementsauthority opposed most forcefully by unions (Q#15). A full 71% of journalists favor such a policy, while only 10% oppose it. According to an October 1997 Hart-Teeter/NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, the rate of opposition to "fast-track" amongst the general public is over five times that of the rate amongst journalists. Only 35% of the public says it favors "fast-track." A full 56% oppose it. In the debate over trade, most journalists tend to agree with the corporate position on the issue, while most members of the public side with the critical views of labor and many consumer and environmental groups.
8. Medical Care
As indicated above under "Economic Priorities," journalists are less interested than the general public in requiring that employers provide health insurance to their employees. Journalists are also less likely than the public to believe that the federal government should guarantee medical care for those who don't have health insurance (Q#16). While 43% of journalists felt that the government should guarantee medical care, a similar 35% felt that this was not the responsibility of the government. In contrast, a February 1996 New York Times/CBS News poll found that the general public supports government guaranteed medical care by more than a two-to-one margin (64% to 29%).
Post a Comment
<< Home