Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
Don't confuse causation and correlation. There's no direct evidence that a supposed liberal bias is responsible for a lower rate of circulation. I would venture a guess that the internet is more responsible than anything else, and if you check Alexa, you can see that the newspaper websites are very popular. The NYT website gets a ton of hits per day, and it's on the rise.
There is a bias toward radical conservative ideology and centrism in media. Obama is centrist.
|
How do you explain the conservative WSJ circulation to individuals going up? Also, subscribers to their on-line edition pay for that as well. They grow in spite of the internet.
And, again I find it interesting how frequently the WSJ editorials are summarily dismissed on the board, but we talk about editorials from publications with declining reach and influence.
-----Added 27/10/2008 at 01 : 54 : 28-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
i'm surprised that you bothered to repeat the talking point, ace.
|
You think they feed me talking points and I repeat them? If that were true, I would suggest people stop reading what I post. Personally, I see no value in talking points, and I actually think that most people, including me, post what they believe.