William Tate over at IBD Editorials highlights the a stunning disparity between the donations given by the media to Democrats and those who gave to Republicans this cycle.
Now the notion of liberal media bias is nothing new, in fact, it’s been talked about at length on these pages as well polls done by pew and other pollsters showing that a majority of Americans think the media is liberally biased and in the tank for Obama!
Nearly four-in-ten (37%) say that in covering the Democratic race, news organizations have been biased toward Obama while just 8% say they have been biased toward Clinton; 40% say news organizations have shown no bias in their coverage. Substantial minorities of Republicans (45%) and independents (40%) say the press has been biased toward Obama; somewhat fewer Democrats (35%) see a pro-Obama bias.
That point was driven home over the last week with the fact that for the first time in history network anchors will accompany a presidential candidate on an overseas trip!
IN researching his piece William took the old adage - Follow the money - and like other before him found strong proof for the accusation of liberal media bias.
An analysis of federal records shows that the amount of money journalists contributed so far this election cycle favors Democrats by a 15:1 ratio over Republicans, with $225,563 going to Democrats, only $16,298 to Republicans .
Two-hundred thirty-five journalists donated to Democrats, just 20 gave to Republicans — a margin greater than 10-to-1. An even greater disparity, 20-to-1, exists between the number of journalists who donated to Barack Obama and John McCain.
Searches for other newsroom categories (reporters, correspondents, news editors, anchors, newspaper editors and publishers) produces 311 donors to Democrats to 30 donors to Republicans, a ratio of just over 10-to-1. In terms of money, $279,266 went to Dems, $20,709 to Republicans, a 14-to-1 ratio.
He also observed:
The contributions add up to $315,533 to Democrats and $22,656 to Republicans — most of that to Ron Paul, who was supported by many liberals as a stalking horse to John McCain, a la Rush Limbaugh’s Operation Chaos with Hillary and Obama.
What is truly remarkable about the list is that, discounting contributions to Paul and Rudy Giuliani, who was a favorite son for many folks in the media, the totals look like this: $315,533 to Democrats, $3,150 to Republicans (four individuals who donated to McCain).
Let me repeat: $315,533 to Democrats, $3,150 to Republicans — a ratio of 100-to-1. No bias there.
As Good Lt. sited in his write-up for Jawa:
But there is no bias. Never was. Never will be. They’re straight up the middle and non-partisan. It just so happens that 10 out every 11 journalists/editors/managers are donating to Democrats and have been for years. Where they invest their money in this struggling Bush economy is no indication of their political beliefs, however, and it in no way affects their reporting. Only a fool would deduce something so ridiculous.
Nope - donating your money to a candidate you want to win would in no way affect how you cover that candidate. That is not a conflict of interest, not a question of objectivity, and these are not the droids you’re looking for.
They hardly gave any dough to anyone!