You repeat the well-worn GOP talking point that "the left has [most U.S. corporate media]" so it's fair that Faux exists to put forth the GOP line. Please provide some examples of why you believe that to be the case. Identify those issues that have been ignored or slanted or overreported in such a way that has benefitted Dem candidates or hurt republicans.

Note that my request concerns examples of media coverage. Not the party for which you imagine some reporter might vote, or for whom a "journalist" might have worked early in his or her career. I don't want to hear that you imagine Dan Rather and Katie Couric, who were singled out in 'Fahrenheit 9/11' as pro-Bush Jr. war cheerleaders, favor Dems, etc.

Elephant Dung, what's this? You're unable to provide any actual examples of "liberal bias" by the U.S. corporate media? Why am I not surprised.

Meanwhile, Faux News has been CAUGHT instructing its reporters to look for examples of Muslim joy over the 2006 election (you know, to show how "the terrorists" vote Dem); and Mr. Murdoch has ADMITTED using his media empire to promote the invasion of Iraq. And then there are the examples of Fox's pettiness, as when it ID'd Mark Foley as a "D", etc.

Folks, Faux News is not merely a conservative counterweight to the US corporate media's supposed "liberal slant" (e.g., by treating Iraq as something less than a glorious success). With Faux, we're talking about partisan right-wing media that actively seeks, and perhaps even creates (a la 'Tomorrow Never Dies') news to fit its pro-GOP agenda. No matter how silly the wingnuts get, such as when imagining that Tom Brokaw's raised eyebrow betrays his secret liberal bias, etc., they've never accused the corporate media of doing anything remotely as partisan as that which Faux has been caught and/or has admitted doing.

Joan Walsh has advised us to discuss Salon's feature rather than take up space arguing with other readers; and from now on I will try to honor her request.

Elephant Dung, nice work hijacking a discussion of the appropriate Lib/Dem response to the overt pro-GOP bias of Faux News, and deflecting it into goading Salon's readers into defending NPR and its "liberal bias" (if any). You certainly earned your salary today.

Meanwhile, you can't seem to name even a single example of that oft-heard of yet seldom seen "liberal bias" in the corporate media. (Iraq? Jeez, could the U.S. media have GIVEN Bush-Cheney any more of a complete pass? Global warming? Could the U.S. media have ignored science in deference to the GOP's "contrary view" any longer than it did?)

http://mediamatters.org/

But I know you're as little interested in "my" web site as I am in any web site proffered by someone who calls him or herself "Elephantman", and the same is true in re the GOP's faux think tanks and its Faux News channel(s). I am however curious if you can back up your tired "liberal media" claim with even one example of how GE, Disney, Viacom, or Time Warner slanted its coverage in order to aid a Dem (Gore? Kerry?) or hurt a GOP.

Elephant Dung, you really make me laugh. You claim liberals "have" CBS, ABC, & NBC, etc., yet the most egregious examples of liberal media bias you can come up with are the alleged personal beliefs of two CNN International Correspondents; a 30-year old story on ABC's '20/20' before it was bought by Disney; and the botched reporting about Bush Jr.'s AWOL/desertion from the Texas ANG that caused Dan Rather to lose his job at CBS?

None of which even if true compares with the overt pro-GOP and admitted pro-war bias of Faux News. As the saying goes, I know there must be liberal media out there somewhere, because every time I turn on my TV or radio or open a newspaper or magazine I hear lots of right-wing republicans bitching about it. And yes, I can provide numerous examples of the pro-GOP bias of the corporate media, if you're interested. But be warned: my examples are of actual biased coverage that hurt Dems and/or aided the GOP, not what I imagine.

Elephant Dung, you and the wingnuts always point to the personal political views -- real or imagined -- of newsreaders and correspondents. I see now that you are simply projecting, and that just as you would be unable to report the news or (god forbid) prosecute a crime without interjecting your personal political views, you imagine the same is true for Dems.

You are wrong. What matters is bias in actual news coverage; and the fact that you are unable to point to a single instance of biased reporting that aided a Dem or hurt a GOP is telling. Assuming for the sake of argument that most newsreaders and correspondents do vote for Dems, what you have is a lot of Libs hiding their personal views and doing their jobs as professionals, even slanting their work to reflect the conservative values of their corporate bosses. That certainly is my experience of U.S. offices; and I can offer many examples of biased corporate media coverage that hurt Dems and/or helped the GOP.

When I look at Chris Matthews, for example, I see an Irish Catholic who clearly relished the impeachment of a pro-choice Dem, who delighted in the swiftboating of another Dem, and who loves Bush Jr. as a strong authority figure practically to the point of wanting to have his baby. You claim to see the fact that decades ago he worked for Tip O'Neill -- a Democrat, indeed, but an anti-choice Irish Catholic -- as somehow relevant to his bias.

My way is the correct way to judge media bias. Your way is not correct, and I suspect not offered in good faith, but rather as a way of confusing and distorting the discussion. Which you succeeded in doing; again, you earned your pay today. Cheers.