Changes

A [[Wikipedia]] user can choose from 32 different categories  to self-identify their political ideology.  There are 240 users who chose to self-identify as liberal, and 75 who self-identified as conservative. This means that the group of editors on Wikipedia that chose to self-identify has a liberal quotient of about 3:1.  Or three liberals for every one conservative.  By combining these two sets of data you would not get proof that Wikipedia is six times more liberal that the average American, because that number requires more than 100% of Americans.  It also requires that you treat the above ratios as fractions (3/1 is six times 1/2) rather than as ratios (3/4 is much greater than 1/3).  

A [[Wikipedia]] user can choose from 32 different categories  to self-identify their political ideology.  There are 240 users who chose to self-identify as liberal, and 75 who self-identified as conservative. This means that the group of editors on Wikipedia that chose to self-identify has a liberal quotient of about 3:1.  Or three liberals for every one conservative.  By combining these two sets of data you would not get proof that Wikipedia is six times more liberal that the average American, because that number requires more than 100% of Americans.  It also requires that you treat the above ratios as fractions (3/1 is six times 1/2) rather than as ratios (3/4 is much greater than 1/3).  

   

   

Groups having a high liberal quotient would include university faculties, the National Education Association, the leadership of the [[Democratic Party]], the management of the ''Village Voice'' and ''New York Times'', and the leaders of the [[ACLU]]. Groups having a low liberal quotient would include a trade association of small business owners, an association of Christian athletes, and worshipers at church on an ordinary Sunday, with the exception of black protestant congregations [http://pewforum.org/docs/index.php?DocID=174].

Groups having a high liberal quotient would include university faculties, the National Education Association, the leadership of the [[Democratic Party]], the management of the ''Village Voice'' and ''New York Times'', and the leaders of the [[ACLU]]. Groups having a low liberal quotient would include a trade association of small business owners, an association of Christian athletes, and worshipers at church on an ordinary Sunday, with the exception of black Protestant congregations [http://pewforum.org/docs/index.php?DocID=174].

== Comparison to Other Metrics ==

== Comparison to Other Metrics ==

A more fundamental criticism is directed to the use of the liberal quotient when applied to media outlets or encyclopedias. Rather than estimating the political orientation of editors, critics propose to consider the political orientation of the actual content. Recent scientific studies on media bias look at the media content, and not at the orientation of the editors, and use in addition other measures than the quotient of articles with a liberal bias versus articles with a conservative bias  [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=947640#PaperDownload][http://ideas.repec.org/p/umc/wpaper/0501.html].  Note, that both studies nevertheless conclude that most media outlets have a liberal bias.

A more fundamental criticism is directed to the use of the liberal quotient when applied to media outlets or encyclopedias. Rather than estimating the political orientation of editors, critics propose to consider the political orientation of the actual content. Recent scientific studies on media bias look at the media content, and not at the orientation of the editors, and use in addition other measures than the quotient of articles with a liberal bias versus articles with a conservative bias  [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=947640#PaperDownload][http://ideas.repec.org/p/umc/wpaper/0501.html].  Note, that both studies nevertheless conclude that most media outlets have a liberal bias.

Another problem with applying this metric to media outlets and encyclopedia is that, in contrast to groups, unbiased articles, the analog to moderates, do not swing their orientation in the presence of biased articles. An encyclopedia with 99.7% unbiased articles, 0.2% liberally biased articles, and 0.1% conservatively biased articles, has the same liberal bias as a product with 66.6% liberally biased articles, 33.3% conservative articles , 0.1% unbiased articles. However, the first would be considered a reliable source of information, while the second would be highly unreliable. And this despite having the same liberal quotient. Even if the influence of moderates in a group of people might be unclear, the influence of unbiased articles on on the reliability of an encyclopedia is obvious.

Another problem with applying this metric to media outlets and encyclopedia is that, in contrast to groups, unbiased articles, the analog to moderates, do not swing their orientation in the presence of biased articles. An encyclopedia with 99.7% unbiased articles, 0.2% liberally biased articles, and 0.1% conservatively biased articles, has the same liberal bias as a product with 66.6% liberally biased articles, 33.3% conservative articles, 0.1% unbiased articles. However, the first would be considered a reliable source of information, while the second would be highly unreliable. And this despite having the same liberal quotient. Even if the influence of moderates in a group of people might be unclear, the influence of unbiased articles on on the reliability of an encyclopedia is obvious.

Other criticism of the liberal quotient is directed at the way it is used in comparison of the bias of Wikipedia with statistically sound results from a Harris Poll. The identified problems are:  

Other criticism of the liberal quotient is directed at the way it is used in comparison of the bias of Wikipedia with statistically sound results from a Harris Poll. The identified problems are: