<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Look whose political coverage is most fair and balanced</title>
	<atom:link href="http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/</link>
	<description>news and commentary from a conservative perspective</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:38:11 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Brutally Honest</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-205281</link>
		<dc:creator>Brutally Honest</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:11:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/#comment-205281</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Fox News is most balanced according to University study...&lt;/strong&gt;

This is sure to set teeth on edge, veins in the neck to bulge and the media elite to froth at the mouth:These results are from CMPA’s 2008 ElectionNewsWatch Project. They are based on a scientific content analysis of all...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Fox News is most balanced according to University study&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>This is sure to set teeth on edge, veins in the neck to bulge and the media elite to froth at the mouth:These results are from CMPA’s 2008 ElectionNewsWatch Project. They are based on a scientific content analysis of all&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TheOtherSide</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-204798</link>
		<dc:creator>TheOtherSide</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2007 19:29:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/#comment-204798</guid>
		<description>Did anyone actually see the report? (&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cmpa.com/releases/07_12_21_Election_Study.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;)

Why weren&#039;t the other cable news channels included in this study? They based Fox&#039;s results on only the 1st 30 minutes of Brit Hume&#039;s show...I wonder if the results would have been the same if the looked at O&#039;Reilly of Hannity &amp; Colmes?

Come on guys this was clearly a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Media_and_Public_Affairs#Funding&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;conservative-funded study&lt;/a&gt;!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Did anyone actually see the report? (<a href="http://www.cmpa.com/releases/07_12_21_Election_Study.pdf" rel="nofollow">here</a>)</p>
<p>Why weren&#8217;t the other cable news channels included in this study? They based Fox&#8217;s results on only the 1st 30 minutes of Brit Hume&#8217;s show&#8230;I wonder if the results would have been the same if the looked at O&#8217;Reilly of Hannity &amp; Colmes?</p>
<p>Come on guys this was clearly a <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Media_and_Public_Affairs#Funding" rel="nofollow">conservative-funded study</a>!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry F.</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-204594</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry F.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2007 13:30:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/#comment-204594</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;evaluations of Republicans were more negative – 40% positive vs. 60% negative&lt;/blockquote&gt;


Well, actually, I am quite shocked.  It was only 60% negative from the broadcast networks.

Maybe the subheadline should have read &quot;Obama, Huckabee Fare Best; &lt;strike&gt;FOX Is Most Balanced&lt;/strike&gt; ABC, CBS, NBC, et al Not Quite As Imbalanced (not a typo).&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>evaluations of Republicans were more negative – 40% positive vs. 60% negative</p></blockquote>
<p>Well, actually, I am quite shocked.  It was only 60% negative from the broadcast networks.</p>
<p>Maybe the subheadline should have read &#8220;Obama, Huckabee Fare Best; <strike>FOX Is Most Balanced</strike> ABC, CBS, NBC, et al Not Quite As Imbalanced (not a typo).&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FOX is the Most Balanced U.S. Media &#171; BUUUUURRRRNING HOT</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-204529</link>
		<dc:creator>FOX is the Most Balanced U.S. Media &#171; BUUUUURRRRNING HOT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2007 07:49:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/#comment-204529</guid>
		<description>[...] is the Most Balanced U.S.&#160;Media  Via The Jawa Report and Malkin, here&#8217;s the conclusion of a study made by the non-profit, politically neutral, [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] is the Most Balanced U.S.&nbsp;Media  Via The Jawa Report and Malkin, here&#8217;s the conclusion of a study made by the non-profit, politically neutral, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MikeO</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-204461</link>
		<dc:creator>MikeO</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2007 04:41:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/#comment-204461</guid>
		<description>Being Fox seems to have a nearly complete boycott on mentioning Fred Thompson (probably because he refuses to &#039;come to the mountain&#039; of Bill O., or any other would-be media kingmakers), I&#039;m not sure if they are completely fair and balanced.  Watch their coverage and see if he is mentioned as much as you&#039;d expect for somebody polling third in Iowa.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Being Fox seems to have a nearly complete boycott on mentioning Fred Thompson (probably because he refuses to &#8216;come to the mountain&#8217; of Bill O., or any other would-be media kingmakers), I&#8217;m not sure if they are completely fair and balanced.  Watch their coverage and see if he is mentioned as much as you&#8217;d expect for somebody polling third in Iowa.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ezupirate75</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-204442</link>
		<dc:creator>ezupirate75</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2007 03:31:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/#comment-204442</guid>
		<description>Mookie, The study, I can find lots on Lichter.  All of the networks thrive on sensationalism, even Fox which has to be the only reason they keep the spitter.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mookie, The study, I can find lots on Lichter.  All of the networks thrive on sensationalism, even Fox which has to be the only reason they keep the spitter.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: brooklyn red</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-204387</link>
		<dc:creator>brooklyn red</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2007 01:20:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/#comment-204387</guid>
		<description>Television, Ew.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Television, Ew.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: deepdiver</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-204383</link>
		<dc:creator>deepdiver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2007 01:12:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/#comment-204383</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt; On December 27th, 2007 at 6:48 pm, huggybear said:
For the 24-hour networks, sensationalism [which leads to higher ratings, aka $$$] always comes first.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
I&#039;ll have to agree in general - just think Natalie Holloway.  On the other hand, I still trust FNC a LOT more than I trust ABC/CBS/NBC hacks to get accurate, balanced news.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p> On December 27th, 2007 at 6:48 pm, huggybear said:<br />
For the 24-hour networks, sensationalism [which leads to higher ratings, aka $$$] always comes first.</p></blockquote>
<p>I&#8217;ll have to agree in general &#8211; just think Natalie Holloway.  On the other hand, I still trust FNC a LOT more than I trust ABC/CBS/NBC hacks to get accurate, balanced news.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RetFireman</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-204377</link>
		<dc:creator>RetFireman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2007 01:06:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/#comment-204377</guid>
		<description>huggybear I was referring to rusty there Huggy...but if the guilt fits...

Maybe you should find out before YOU make an &quot;ad hominem&quot; attack.

And if you thought that was an attack...you must not have been reading my post very long poo-butt.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>huggybear I was referring to rusty there Huggy&#8230;but if the guilt fits&#8230;</p>
<p>Maybe you should find out before YOU make an &#8220;ad hominem&#8221; attack.</p>
<p>And if you thought that was an attack&#8230;you must not have been reading my post very long poo-butt.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mookie</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-204365</link>
		<dc:creator>Mookie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2007 00:35:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/#comment-204365</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Do you have a link to anything more than the press release? It was very light on facts to look at.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I&#039;m sorry, the press release for the study or Richter working for Fox?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Do you have a link to anything more than the press release? It was very light on facts to look at.</p></blockquote>
<p>I&#8217;m sorry, the press release for the study or Richter working for Fox?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: huggybear</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-204350</link>
		<dc:creator>huggybear</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2007 23:48:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/#comment-204350</guid>
		<description>ezupirate75 - Fair enough about content analysis, I spoke too soon!  Still, a little more transparency on their part is all I ask.

I agree with Radiojoe1470 [#54] - the media may have a bias against Republicans, but when they smell blood, partisanship goes out the window.  For the 24-hour networks, sensationalism [which leads to higher ratings, aka $$$] always comes first.  Why do you think Fox hangs on to whats-his-&#039;stache?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ezupirate75 &#8211; Fair enough about content analysis, I spoke too soon!  Still, a little more transparency on their part is all I ask.</p>
<p>I agree with Radiojoe1470 [#54] &#8211; the media may have a bias against Republicans, but when they smell blood, partisanship goes out the window.  For the 24-hour networks, sensationalism [which leads to higher ratings, aka $$$] always comes first.  Why do you think Fox hangs on to whats-his-&#8217;stache?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Ansell</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-204326</link>
		<dc:creator>John Ansell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2007 23:19:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/#comment-204326</guid>
		<description>So you&#039;re the one that watched MSNBC. LOL.  Lets remember, the democrats refuse to go on FOX News and later they will claim that they didn&#039;t get any time.  Hillary on O&#039;Reilly?  It&#039;s not going to happen.  You see we&#039;re in the middle of global warming so there is no way hell will freeze over.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So you&#8217;re the one that watched MSNBC. LOL.  Lets remember, the democrats refuse to go on FOX News and later they will claim that they didn&#8217;t get any time.  Hillary on O&#8217;Reilly?  It&#8217;s not going to happen.  You see we&#8217;re in the middle of global warming so there is no way hell will freeze over.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JunkYardBlog</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-204309</link>
		<dc:creator>JunkYardBlog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2007 22:55:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/#comment-204309</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Nothing New Under The Sun:  Fox News is Most Centrist...&lt;/strong&gt;

Everyone&#039;s linking the new study showing Fox&#039;s evening programming is the most centrist broadcasting out there. I&#039;m not surprised. A December 2004 study of the major media--summarized nicely here-- found exactly the same thing. What changed? It&#039;s a...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Nothing New Under The Sun:  Fox News is Most Centrist&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>Everyone&#8217;s linking the new study showing Fox&#8217;s evening programming is the most centrist broadcasting out there. I&#8217;m not surprised. A December 2004 study of the major media&#8211;summarized nicely here&#8211; found exactly the same thing. What changed? It&#8217;s a&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ezupirate75</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-204308</link>
		<dc:creator>ezupirate75</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2007 22:54:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/#comment-204308</guid>
		<description>never a good look for anyone of any political persuasion.

When I watch Fox &amp; they have a political discussion they almost always have a Dem. analyst &amp; a Rep. analyst &amp; while I have never put a stop watch on it, it appears they get about the same amount of time.  The last time I watched MSNBC, Olberman had on Randi Rhodes of Air America &amp; a Dem. analyst &amp; that was considered a fair discussion by their standards.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>never a good look for anyone of any political persuasion.</p>
<p>When I watch Fox &amp; they have a political discussion they almost always have a Dem. analyst &amp; a Rep. analyst &amp; while I have never put a stop watch on it, it appears they get about the same amount of time.  The last time I watched MSNBC, Olberman had on Randi Rhodes of Air America &amp; a Dem. analyst &amp; that was considered a fair discussion by their standards.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Ansell</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-204301</link>
		<dc:creator>John Ansell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2007 22:47:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/27/look-whose-hillary-coverage-is-most-fair-and-balanced/#comment-204301</guid>
		<description>Pirate #53, It&#039;s Alan Combover.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pirate #53, It&#8217;s Alan Combover.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- NEW -->
