Ebook Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, by Tim Groseclose
It's no any type of faults when others with their phone on their hand, as well as you're also. The distinction could last on the material to open up Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose When others open up the phone for talking as well as talking all points, you can sometimes open up and check out the soft data of the Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose Certainly, it's unless your phone is readily available. You could additionally make or wait in your laptop or computer system that alleviates you to review Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose.
Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, by Tim Groseclose
Ebook Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, by Tim Groseclose
Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose Exactly how an easy suggestion by reading can boost you to be an effective individual? Reading Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose is an extremely simple activity. Yet, just how can many individuals be so careless to check out? They will certainly like to invest their free time to chatting or hanging out. When actually, reading Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose will provide you a lot more possibilities to be effective finished with the efforts.
When some individuals looking at you while reading Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose, you may really feel so happy. However, instead of other individuals feels you must instil in on your own that you are reading Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose not because of that factors. Reading this Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose will certainly give you greater than individuals admire. It will overview of know greater than the people looking at you. Already, there are lots of sources to knowing, reading a book Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose still comes to be the first choice as a terrific method.
Why ought to be reading Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose Again, it will certainly depend on just how you feel and also think of it. It is undoubtedly that a person of the benefit to take when reading this Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose; you can take much more lessons straight. Even you have actually not undergone it in your life; you can obtain the encounter by checking out Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose And currently, we will introduce you with the online book Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose in this website.
What sort of book Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose you will like to? Now, you will certainly not take the printed book. It is your time to obtain soft data book Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose instead the published papers. You could enjoy this soft file Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose in at any time you anticipate. Also it is in anticipated location as the other do, you could check out guide Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose in your device. Or if you really want a lot more, you could read on your computer system or laptop to get full display leading. Juts find it right here by downloading and install the soft documents Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind, By Tim Groseclose in link web page.
Dr. Tim Groseclose, a professor of political science and economics at UCLA, has spent years constructing precise, quantitative measures of the slant of media outlets. He does this by measuring the political content of news, as a way to measure the PQ, or "political quotient" of voters and politicians.
Among his conclusions are: (i) all mainstream media outlets have a liberal bias; and (ii) while some supposedly conservative outlets―such the Washington Times or Fox News' Special Report―do lean right, their conservative bias is less than the liberal bias of most mainstream outlets.
Groseclose contends that the general leftward bias of the media has shifted the PQ of the average American by about 20 points, on a scale of 100, the difference between the current political views of the average American, and the political views of the average resident of Orange County, California or Salt Lake County, Utah. With Left Turn readers can easily calculate their own PQ―to decide for themselves if the bias exists. This timely, much-needed study brings fact to this often overheated debate.
- Sales Rank: #127359 in Books
- Brand: Brand: St. Martin's Griffin
- Published on: 2012-02-28
- Released on: 2012-02-28
- Original language: English
- Number of items: 1
- Dimensions: 8.50" h x .69" w x 5.50" l, .60 pounds
- Binding: Paperback
- 304 pages
Features
- Used Book in Good Condition
Review
“With knowledge there is victory and power. This book helps Americans learn the truth and discover how we are being manipulated by the mainstream media. It is hard to understate how brilliant and insightful Left Turn is. It is, I believe, one of the most important books ever written about American politics.” ―Congressman Paul Broun, M.D. (R-Ga.)
“I'm no conservative, but I loved Left Turn. Tim Groseclose has written the best kind of book: one that is firmly anchored in rigorous academic research, but is still so much fun to read that it is hard to put down. Liberals will not like the conclusions of this book, which in my opinion, is all the more reason why they should want to read it.” ―Steven Levitt, Professor of Economics, University of Chicago, and co-author of Freakonomics.
“This book--an evolution from the pioneering article in the 2005 Quarterly Journal of Economics by Groseclose and Jeffrey Milyo--uses a clever statistical technique to construct an objective measure of conservative or liberal bias in news coverage. This method and those now adopted by other serious researchers show clearly that most U.S. news outlets lean left. Most frighteningly, we learn that the media bias actually affects the ways that people think and vote.” ―Robert Barro, Professor of Economics, Harvard University, and Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution.
“This book serves up the most convincing evidence for media bias I have seen, ever. Tim Groseclose is the leading academic scholar in the area, but this is a smartly-written book which every person can read for enlightenment and also for pleasure.” ―Tyler Cowen, Professor of Economics, George Mason University, and co-author of the internationally acclaimed economics blog, MarginalRevolution.com.
“In writing this book Professor Groseclose has done a great service for our country.” ―Congressman Allen West (R-Fla.), (Lt. Col. U.S. Army, ret.)
About the Author
TIM GROSECLOSE is the Marvin Hoffenberg Professor of American Politics at UCLA. He has joint appointments in the political science and economics departments. He has held previous faculty appointments at Caltech, Stanford University, Ohio State University, Harvard University, and Carnegie Mellon University
Excerpt. � Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
� 1.�� What Are PQs and How Do They Reveal Media Bias?
�
“COME ON. POLITICAL science isn’t really a science,” said my friend Dawson Engler one day, trying to goad me.
Engler, one of the country’s premier computer scientists, is currently a professor at Stanford, where his specialty is operating systems. He has constructed his own operating system�… twice.
He is the type of person who succeeds at nearly anything he tries. Born in Yuma, Arizona, during high school he placed second in the “Teenage Mr. Arizona” bodybuilding contest. After graduating from Arizona State University, he enrolled in the highly prestigious computer-science PhD program at MIT. It is unusual for a PhD student to publish a paper in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Yet Engler published eight while a doctoral student. Shortly after Stanford hired him, for a brief period he dated one of the actresses from Baywatch.
When Engler goaded me, both of us held positions at MIT, and he knew that my position was in the political-science department. At MIT, which is filled with “real” scientists and engineers, you often hear quips like Engler’s. So when he made it, I was prepared.
“Look,” I said. “We can both agree that if you can graph something, then you can describe it mathematically.”
“Yeah,” said Engler.
“And people, all the time, talk about politicians being left wing or right wing.”
“Okay,” said Engler.
“And so if a position is left wing or right wing, then you can graph it.… Which means you can describe it mathematically.… Which means it’s science.”
Engler smiled. I don’t think I really convinced him, but he didn’t goad me any further. At least in my mind, I’d won the day’s debate.
*���*���*
WITHIN POLITICAL SCIENCE a small industry exists to do the “science” that I described to Engler: to calculate precise, numerical measurements that describe the liberalness or conservativeness of politicians. In fact, at the time Engler made his quip, I was working on such a project. Indeed, the political quotients that I describe in this book are based on that research.
A person’s PQ is a number, generally between 0 and 100, that describes how liberal he or she is. I have created a Web site, www.timgroseclose.com/calculate-your-pq, which allows you to compute your own PQ. I have computed PQs for members of Congress by observing their record on roll call votes.
By answering the following ten questions,1 you can get a rough approximation of your PQ. When you answer the questions, try to put yourself in the shoes of the members of Congress and decide how you would have voted at the time that the politicians considered the measure. For instance, some people feel that the “Cash for Clunkers” program was not as successful as they hoped or thought it would be. Accordingly, when you answer the question related to this program—as well as when you answer the other questions—think about your opinion of the issue when it was considered in Congress, not necessarily about how you feel about it now.
�1.��� On January 29, 2009, the Senate passed the SCHIP bill (State Children’s Health Insurance Program). The bill would provide matching funds to states for health insurance to families with children. The funds would be limited to families with incomes less than three times the federal poverty level. The cost would be offset by increasing the federal tax on cigarettes from $0.61 to $1.00 a pack. Democrats voted 58–0 in favor of the bill; Republicans voted 8–32 against the bill.2
a. I would have favored the bill.
b. I can’t decide.
c. I would have opposed the bill.
�2.��� On February 26, 2009, the Senate passed the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act. The act would create a House district for D.C., and simultaneously create an additional House district in Utah. The Utah district would be subject to change or elimination by future censuses. The act would give D.C. one vote in the Electoral College, however it would not give D.C. representation in the Senate. Democrats favored the bill 56–2; Republicans opposed it 5–35.
a. I would have favored the bill.
b. I can’t decide.
c. I would have opposed the bill.
�3.��� On April 1, 2009, the House passed a bill that would limit the bonuses of executives if their company received TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) funds. It granted authority to the secretary of the treasury to set standards for such executive compensation, including determining what is “excessive compensation.” Democrats favored the bill 236–8; Republicans opposed it 11–163.
a. I would have favored the bill.
b. I can’t decide.
c. I would have opposed the bill.
�4.��� On April 30, 2009, Senator Richard Durbin proposed an amendment to the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act. His amendment, titled “Prevention of Mortgage Foreclosures,” was sometimes called the “cramdown” provision. According to the provision, if a homeowner’s income was low enough (less than 80 percent of the median income), then a bankruptcy judge could reduce the level of the interest and principle that the home owner owed on a mortgage. Democrats favored the amendment 45–12; Republicans opposed it 0–39.
a. I would have favored the amendment.
b. I can’t decide.
c. I would have opposed the amendment.
�5.��� On June 18, 2009, the House considered a major appropriations bill. Jerry Lewis, a Republican from California, introduced an amendment to the bill that would bar funds from being used to shut down the Guant�namo Bay prison. The amendment would have acted against an executive order that President Obama had issued to close the facility. Democrats opposed the amendment 39–213; Republicans favored the amendment 173–3.
a. I would have opposed�the amendment (that is, I would have favored shutting down Guant�namo).
b. I can’t decide.
c. I would have favored�the amendment.
�6.��� On June 26, 2009, the House passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act, the main provision of which was to create a “cap and trade system.” Under the system, energy producers would be allotted a cap on the pollutants they could emit, but they could buy credits from other energy producers if they wanted to emit more pollutants. Or, if they emitted less pollutants than their cap, they could sell some of their credits to other producers. The bill set a target of reducing emissions to 83 percent of the 2005 level by the year 2050. The act also included several billions of dollars for incentives for businesses to invest in green technologies. Democrats favored the bill 210–43; Republicans opposed it 8–169.
a. I would have favored the bill.
b. I can’t decide.
c. I would have opposed the bill.
�7.��� On July 31, 2009, the House passed the “Cash for Clunkers” bill (officially named “The Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Program). It provided $2 billion in vouchers to people who traded in an older, less fuel-efficient car and bought a newer, more fuel-efficient car. Democrats favored the bill 238–14; Republicans opposed it 78–95.
a. I would have favored the bill.
b. I can’t decide.
c. I would have opposed the bill.
�8.��� On August 26, 2009, the Senate voted on the confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor to be a justice on the Supreme Court. Democrats favored her confirmation 58–0; Republicans opposed it 9–31.
a. I would have favored her confirmation.
b. I can’t decide.
c. I would have opposed her confirmation.
�9.��� On November 8, 2009, the Senate considered an amendment proposed by Senator Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) to the “Obamacare” health bill. His amendment would have barred federal money to be used to pay for an abortion. Further, federal money could not help pay for any health plan that covered abortions. The Democrats opposed the amendment 7–52; Republicans favored it 38–2. (Technically, the vote was on a motion by Barbara Boxer to table the Nelson amendment.)
a. I would have opposed the amendment.
b. I can’t decide.
c. I would have favored the amendment.
10.� On December 15, 2009, the Senate voted on a provision to allow U.S. citizens to import prescription drugs. Most important, it would have allowed citizens to order prescription drugs from Canadian pharmacies, which often sold the drugs at lower prices than U.S. pharmacies did. (The provision was the Dorgan amendment to the Reid amendment to the Pharmaceutical Market Access and Drug Safety Act.) Democrats opposed the measure 28–31; Republicans favored it 23–17.
a. I would have favored the provision.
b. I can’t decide.
c. I would have opposed the provision.
Give yourself ten points for each time that you answered “a,” five points for each “b,” and zero points for each “c.” Next, add up the points. That is approximately your PQ.
One feature of the PQ is that it is constructed from roll call votes in Congress. This means that simply by noting how members of Congress voted on those roll calls, I can calculate their PQs, and you can compare your PQ to theirs. The following are the PQs of some well-known politicians.
PQs and Media Bias
Perhaps the ...
Most helpful customer reviews
135 of 157 people found the following review helpful.
An Insightful Look at Media Bias
By T. R. Kanavy
Note: Normally, when discussing a book with political implications, I attempt to present an opinion tailored to the sensitivities of members of each major political party concerning the work in question. In the case of Left Turn, I have forgone this formula due to the objective presentation of the book and the value it serves despite political affiliations.
The Author:
While reading this book, I experienced one constant mantra of thought: Dr. Groseclose is an unequivocal expert on the subject of media bias and relating politics. This book is not the construct of a sharp-tongued political analyst, but rather the work of an experienced and astute-observer utilizing a strong skillset in scientific reasoning and advanced calculation. When reading the author's biography, you will discover that Groseclose is a generally conservative professor of political science at UCLA and a visiting professor at several Ivy League universities. Those of us, who have been to university, know that such creatures (non-liberal university academics) are about as common as unicorns, leprechauns and a no-strings-attached weekend at a vacation timeshare. This facet alone might be reason enough to read Left Turn, but fortunately I can provide a few more motives.
Left Turn:
Left Turn, while written by an openly conservative author is riddled with examples, statistics, empirical data and careful-research in a valid effort to underscore the science of political science. Tim Groseclose, while an admitted conservative, maintains a sufficient measure of integrity throughout by frequently providing the arguments and opinion of liberals and democrats through the voice of his public detractors, liberal acquaintances and colleagues at UCLA- often granting concession and thoughtful rebuttal in such instances. This writing style struck a particular chord with me, as I myself value fairness, objectivity and a presentation of fact without malice. After all, many of our family, friends and loved ones possess varying opinions on inflammatory political matters and for a variety of different reasons. Where most political books today are dipped into a vat of satirical polish that seeks to demean and disparage the intended maligned party; Left Turn focuses on science and reason in an effort to enlighten the public to distortion through media bias. This is also the concept that makes the book a bit unsettling, perhaps more so for those on the left of the political aisle. Yet, I still encourage those on the left to read the book for reason best stated by Winston Churchill "The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is".
Conclusion:
In the end, Left Turn is an easy to read, expertly presented tool for removing a shroud of often unjust media influence that taints the information with which we are inundated. Despite the political party you claim, reading Left Turn will serve you a great measure of powerful insight- that is, essentially, the ability to thoughtfully recognize and interpret bias in the media. Ultimately, understanding media bias is essential to gaining transparency in politics, restoring integrity to journalism and promoting the true will of the governed- a sentiment that we all as Americans should desire.
61 of 79 people found the following review helpful.
A modern Voyage of Discovery
By Edmund Jimenez
*Left Turn*, by Tim Groseclose, is a kind of alien artifact because there is not a single hint of rancor, hostility or disrespect toward those with whom he, assuredly, politically disagrees. Instead, this book is a refreshment for the intellect.
At the outset, Dr. Groseclose declares his political disposition: he is a conservative. However, his private views are rendered irrelevant by his research effort of many years. Most of his colleagues are left of center, yet they all share a devotion to scientific accuracy and good faith.
As a political scientist and economist, Dr. Groseclose's academic accomplishments are impressive. His research is data-driven, brought to life by mathematics, and has been critically- and well-received by his peers.
His book outlines his research. Specifically, Dr. Groseclose explains how he arrives at a numeric value identifying an individual's or organization's position in the political spectrum. Remarkably, 1. the author is able to establish this identification over a range of time; not merely a point in time; and, 2. his research yields an absolute value of political identification, and not a relative one (e.g, Fox News relative to MSNBC). The implications and effects of these discoveries are then addressed by the author.
The organizations given scrutiny, unsurprisingly, comprise news media sources--both print and electronic. It will no doubt be irritating to liberals that Dr. Groseclose's research shows most media to be slanted to the left. And, of course, some conservatives will find validation in the author's conclusion, while judging it as ridiculously obvious. Such reactions would miss the point, I think, because what Dr. Groseclose has provided us, is a precise and objective tool for measuring the political bias of our news sources--whether they be left or right.
The reader becomes an observer of Dr. Groseclose's reflections, inquiries, doubts and research breakthroughs--virtually without recourse to mathematics, all by way of standard English. Along the way too, there are some startling, empirically based conclusions by the author which might nonplus conservatives and liberals.
In addition to identifying sources, the Notes section of the book is valuable because many entries amplify points in the main narrative, again using plain English. If the reader is interested in more detail, he can turn to the author's web site for companion papers which should be available by the time you read this.
Although the author writes extremely well, two points of fault deserve mention. I hope that I'm not being unduly harsh here:
1. Dr. Groseclose's use of indefinite pronouns (he, she) is inconsistent and distracting. His usage is an obvious political construct; it is clear that he, or his editor, succumbed to the pressure of feminist triviality. If memory serves, this particular form of anti-grammar originally struck the academic world hard during the mid-80s. It's a form of grammatical schizophrenia--underlain by the best of intentions, of course.
2. The final ten percent or so of the book is in need of an editor's touch. The writing in this part is a little clumsy and somewhat confusing. Nevertheless, with slight perseverance, the reader will be amply rewarded.
Please bear in mind that I read an advance copy. The released copy will no doubt be enjoyably refined.
During my reading, many questions occurred to me, which only increased my admiration for Dr. Groseclose's wonderful contribution to our understanding of political bias. I marvel at his analyses, insights and civility; his work may well become a new standard. I think that most readers of *Left Turn* will be similarly affected, and have a great deal of intellectual fun too.
22 of 28 people found the following review helpful.
Why Media Bias Matters
By Edward G. Keating
Building on a seminal Quarterly Journal of Economics article, in this book, Professor Tim Groseclose outlines considerable evidence for left-wing bias in the US media and, perhaps more importantly, argues that the bias tilts the US political system to the left.
When, in the middle of the last decade, Professor Groseclose and his co-author provided innovative quantification of leftward bias in the US media, the thesis was controversial, eliciting extensive (and often mean-spirited) reaction toward the authors. Since then, however, Groseclose's argument has become more widely accepted. Indeed, Hillary Clinton's campaign advisors noted (probably validly) extensive media bias toward now-President Obama in the 2008 primary campaign.
Indeed, "now-President" is the key phrase in the last sentence. Not only is the media biased, but that bias matters, i.e., has affected political outcomes in this country. The importance of media bias is the central thesis of "Left Turn" and the methodological enhancement relative to Professor Groseclose's earlier research. He introduces what he terms "the media lambda," a fancy way of suggesting the leftward pull or power of a biased media.
"Left Turn" is not an excessively equation-laden exegesis (though it has very extensive end notes and references). Instead, it is built on anecdotes of how the media matters, i.e., changes the nature of the policy debate and, ultimately, government policies. The heroine of the book is Minneapolis Star Tribune reporter Katherine Kersten, a rare conservative media member who broke the story of the "John Doe" litigation in which passengers on an airplane were sued by Muslim imams for reporting concerns about behavior the passengers perceived to be unusual and possibly threatening. As a result of Ms. Kersten's reporting, legislation was passed that disallowed litigation against witnesses who report suspicions to authorities.
While the book draws attention to Ms. Kersten's work, its broader point is that there are many more left-of-center journalists whose work is pulling political debate and governmental policymaking to the left than the few right-of-center journalists like Ms. Kersten.
Professor Groseclose's empirical estimates of media impact are sizable, perhaps implausibly so. Absent a biased media (and subject to lots of methodological assumptions), he predicts John McCain would have won the 2008 presidential by 56-42 percent. Except, one suspects, now-President Obama would not have been his party's nominee in such a world (at least according to then-candidate Clinton's embittered advisors).
The importance of this book notwithstanding, it's a very entertaining and quick read. For example, Professor Groseclose visited Washington County in southwest Utah. He identified Washington County as one of the country's most conservative counties of a reasonable size. He was looking for an "inverse newsroom," i.e., a county where conservatives are predominant the way liberals are in a modern newsroom. Though, in fact, he fails in that Washington County has far more Democratic voters proportionally than a typical newsroom has Republican voters. Professor Groseclose visited local denizens including Mike Empey who serves as the Democratic congressional representative Jim Matheson's local outreach coordinator. Mr. Empey's somewhat unenviable job is to try to convince Washington County residents that Representative Matheson is not as liberal as the national Democratic Party. It is interesting reading, both intrinsically with respect to what Mr. Empey deals with and when one reflects that he's living a politically inverted life to Ms. Kersten's. But each is ultimately a salmon, swimming valiantly against a current running strongly against them.
On some level, Professor Groseclose's thesis is unremarkable. People often speak of wanting to "make a difference" when they choose their lines of work. Professor Groseclose's argument is that liberal journalists make a difference, a very big difference. It'd be an unintended irony of "Left Turn" if the book ended up encouraging yet-more liberals to enter journalism (or, perhaps more likely, cause fewer liberals to quit journalism than would otherwise be the case) because this distinguished scholar has found their work has made a genuine difference in US political outcomes.
See all 65 customer reviews...
Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, by Tim Groseclose PDF
Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, by Tim Groseclose EPub
Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, by Tim Groseclose Doc
Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, by Tim Groseclose iBooks
Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, by Tim Groseclose rtf
Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, by Tim Groseclose Mobipocket
Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, by Tim Groseclose Kindle
Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, by Tim Groseclose PDF
Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, by Tim Groseclose PDF
Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, by Tim Groseclose PDF
Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, by Tim Groseclose PDF
