MSD

This is a valid point, but the "liberal" bias I refer to is a negative. These media outlets tend to take any anti-establishment stance; any anti-US stance; any pro-left-wing economic stance; and any pro-minority stance; regardless of the surrounding circumstances and frequently with disregard for any valid opposing viewpoints.

I listen to WBAI New York, a Pacifica radio station, which is viewer-supported and free of advertising and corporate sponsorship. While they report on issues such as workers' rights, political dissidence, and a plethora of other topics that would never be cast in a positive light in the mainstream media, they take it to the extreme. Anything Bush says or does is torn apart regardless of merit (even on the rare occasion that he says something deserving of praise.) Hosts sing the praises of the Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro regimes, completely ignoring or dismissing the downsides of both. Any world leader, scholar, or vocal activist who criticizes US policy is trumpeted as a hero without a discussion of the merits of the criticism or the policy. Anytime a young black man is killed by police, it is blown up into a racial issue and cited as yet another case of police brutality and discrimination, even if the victim was a violent criminal, and in some cases when he was threatening police or bystanders. A recent hot issue is universal healthcare, which they will have you think is only opposed by neo-fascists who want the lower and middle classes to starve to death.

I'd rather listen to "independent" and "real" news rather than the drivel and bullshit that spews from the mainstream outlets, but because they cover what corporate interests won't. To claim that a media outlet is free of bias is dishonest, only by acknowledging the ubiquity of bias can we overcome it. Balance opposing interests, give each side of an issue equal time for presentation and equal time for response and discussion. understand that people will criticize and accuse that which they disagree with. Encourage discussion and a marketplace of ideas. Just don't try to tell me that a new source is unbiased or perfectly neutral, because without radical change to both reporting and human nature, it's not possible.