Changes

Independently corroborating the findings above, is the 2002 book length study by political communication researcher Jim A. Kuypers: ''Press Bias and Politics: How the Media Frame Controversial Issues''. In this study of 116 mainstream US papers (including The New York Times, the Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and the San Francisco Chronicle), Kuypers found that the mainstream print press in America operate within a narrow range of liberal beliefs. Those who expressed points of view further to the left were generally ignored, whereas those who expressed moderate or conservative points of view were often actively denigrated or labeled as holding a minority point of view. In short, if a political leader, regardless of party, spoke within the press-supported range of acceptable discourse, he or she would receive positive press coverage. If a politician, again regardless of party, were to speak outside of this range, he or she would receive negative press or be ignored. Kuypers also found that the liberal points of view expressed in editorial and opinion pages were found in hard news coverage of the same issues. Although focusing primarily on the issues of [[race]] and [[homosexuality]], Kuypers found that the press injected opinion into its news coverage of other issues such as [[Welfare|welfare reform]], [[environmental protection]], and [[gun control]]; in all cases favoring a liberal point of view.

Independently corroborating the findings above, is the 2002 book length study by political communication researcher Jim A. Kuypers: ''Press Bias and Politics: How the Media Frame Controversial Issues''. In this study of 116 mainstream US papers (including The New York Times, the Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and the San Francisco Chronicle), Kuypers found that the mainstream print press in America operate within a narrow range of liberal beliefs. Those who expressed points of view further to the left were generally ignored, whereas those who expressed moderate or conservative points of view were often actively denigrated or labeled as holding a minority point of view. In short, if a political leader, regardless of party, spoke within the press-supported range of acceptable discourse, he or she would receive positive press coverage. If a politician, again regardless of party, were to speak outside of this range, he or she would receive negative press or be ignored. Kuypers also found that the liberal points of view expressed in editorial and opinion pages were found in hard news coverage of the same issues. Although focusing primarily on the issues of [[race]] and [[homosexuality]], Kuypers found that the press injected opinion into its news coverage of other issues such as [[Welfare|welfare reform]], [[environmental protection]], and [[gun control]]; in all cases favoring a liberal point of view.

==Liberal media bias==

==Liberal media bias==