I think that decent research could be done on this particular issue, but I saw way too many items in that study that raised bulls4 flags for me.
How 'bout this statement from the article:
"Our estimates for these outlets, we feel, give particular credibility to our efforts, as three of the four moderators for the 2004 presidential and vice-presidential debates came from these three news outlets — Jim Lehrer, Charlie Gibson and Gwen Ifill," Groseclose said. "If these newscasters weren't centrist, staffers for one of the campaign teams would have objected and insisted on other moderators."
Seems a lousy to justify research by saying "surely one side or the other would've complained". Where's they science in a statement like that?
|
