The topic of the media's liberal bias has raised its head again in several threads, so I figured I'd consolidate. We've discussed it before, of course, and it always seemed to me that once the statistics were shown, the threads always died quitely. http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000517184 they are: Its also noteworthy that the number in the media identifying themselves as liberal has actually increased significantly in recent years. Now, while this isn't direct evidence of bias, the only way it could not manifest itself as a bias is if we assume that the liberals are many times as capable of hiding their bias as conservatives. Ie, say 1 in 100 in the local media wear their bias on their sleeve - out of 10,000 reporters, that would mean 12 conservative and 23 liberals display an open bias unless somehow liberals are only half as likely to wear their bias on their sleeve. Now, since the stats are usually a thread-killer, I want to have a look at the issue in a different way. I want to focus on the problem-children because they are the easiest to identify. While it would be an interesting discussion which is worse, subtle bias or overt fraud, at the very least, the overt fraud is easy to recognize. So, I'd like to list some examples of journalistic fraud and related misconduct and what they say about the leanings of the media. My criteria here is that wrongdoing is eventually acknowledged by, at the very least, the media outlet. So in most of my cases (and, I would encourage anyone to adhere to this criteria), a direct statement by the network/paper is involved, as well as people losing their jobs. Cases should not be limited to liberal leans or even any bias at all. Part of what I'm trying to do here is get a sampling of what the relationship is between the liberal fraud, the conservative fraud, and the guys that were just bad reporters. First off, of course, has to be Dan Rather. While Dan Rather escaped unharmed, four people including his producer and the upper management of 60 Minutes (Thursday?) lost their jobs. This was a story specifically designed (as stated in a memo from the producer) to swing the election. http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/J/Ja/Jayson_Blair.htm. This is journalistic fraud at its most basic: he didn't lean left or right, he just fabricated or plagarized pretty much every story he ever wrote for the NY Times. Peter Arnett (my personal favorite): Peter Arnett may well be the source of the idea that liberals hate America. He's far left wing and much of his reporting is anti-American. While his anti-American bias didn't quite get him arrested for treason during Gulf II, it did end, probably permanently, his employment with American media. He now reports for England's "Daily Mirror." No, treason isn't fraud, its just, apparently, the next logical step for him. He lost is CNN job in 1998 due to his story on Operation Tailwind about poison gas use in Vietnam. Though CNN won't admit fraud because of ongoing litigation, several producers were fired over it and Arnett left shortly after. All this for a Pulitzer winner. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/story/71789p-66599c.html: How he ever got out of Jerry Springer's shadow, I'll never understand, but, in any case, I don't consider his misconduct politically motivated - he's just an idiot. While he didn't get in trouble for shooting a segment where he prayed over the spot of an American soldier's death - from 100 miles away - he did get booted out of Iraq for talking about troop movements too much. Jack Kelly: A Pulitzer finalist (pattern...?), Kelly fabricated dozens of stories over 20 years or so. Not politically motivated, he appears to be cut from he same cloth as Jayson Blair: just a lazy liar. HERE is a list of 13 scandals (not necessarily fraud), including some of the cases discussed above. Near as I can tell, at least 4 involve Pulitzer winners or finalists. Coupled with what I just learned about Pulitzer (he along with Hearst invented sensationalism), my general opinion of the media is sinking lower than I ever thought possible. In my searching, I also came across http://www.fraudfactor.com/ffmediafraud9001.html: not a specific reporter, but the bias (and possibly fraud) by the NY Times itself is absolutely breathtaking.