Media Watchers

Every day, I try to check in with the two major media watching websites:Newsbusters.org and Mediamatters.org. Newsbusters is run by the Media Research Group and maintains that the informational media outlets are biased against the Right. Media Matters argues that they are biased against the Right.

Of course, both sites are cripple-shooting. There are so many newspapers, radio stations and tv stations, each producing info on a daily deadline that anyone who took the time could produce anecdotes that show that “the media” is biased against just about every person, country, state, and interest group.

I think the main difference between the two sites is who they think their audience is. Newsbusters assumes that its audience agrees with it. Therefore, it can quip about “phony global warming stories” without justifying the claim.

Media Matters assumes that its audience disagrees with it. Therefore, the bloggers do their homework, and back up every claim. This week, it looked into the claim that the Obama Inauguration cost 4 times as much as Bush’s 2005 inauguration. It pointed out the apples to oranges comparison: Bush inauguration figures don’t include security costs, while the Obama figures do include them. If you compare the private money raised for the two inaugurations, the figures are quite close. Obama spent a little more, but may have even spent less when the figure is adjusted for inflation. Of course, Newsbusters just complains how the media is under reporting the expense of the Obama inauguration.

With this difference in audience, Newsbusters is easily the more readable and entertaining of the sites. Media Matters too often reads like a collection of college term papers.

How curious that when Media Matters hits the news, it is usually characterized as smears and propaganda, and when Newsbusters hits the news, it is cited as a legitimate source.