Similar Blogs

After reading some excerts from Australia's blog, I found several similarities between their blog and ours. First off, their format is the same as ours. Second, many of the issues they discuss are the same as ours. This included the jump in gun sales and Palin's expensive clothes. This probably roots from the fact that Australia was a British colony still fairly recently in history. Also, many people often travel between these two countries.

Odd Man Out

In the USA's blog, FOX News is often a subject of interest. FOX's conservative bias is often criticized in their blog. I think this attention is given because it is different from most of the other networks. The very conservative voice is not frequently heard so it is very obvious to us when it is presented. This confirms their assumption that the USA media leans left.

I have noticed that the telegraph does a similar thing with its videos. Going through the video list there are twice as many videos showing Obama speeking or videos that are supporting Obama than there are of videos showing or supporting McCain. I agree that the Telegraph is liberal and shows support for Obama.

Reviews

This blog has shown different views and opinions. The majority of the posts have stated that the media veers to the left. After reviewing three of our sources, the same is concluded. The newspaper can range from basically fair to moderately left. The reviews were kind of a snapshot of the papers, but they all agree fairly well. Also, like Kevin stated before, pictures say 1000 words. I have not seen any embarrassing pictures of Obama this entire quarter, but they are plentiful for McCain, Palin, and Bush. This is obviously saying something about the media since people often base their opinions on what they see on the news.

All things considered, the United Kingdom's media shows a lean to the left as a whole. If not for all those reasons, then because there has been little to no support seen from the right.

"Times" in the U.K.

The Times Online has a little more to talk about on their "U.S. News" tab. One article says McCain is waking at night crying. In another, Palin says God will help her in next election. It also criticizes gun owners for stocking up on firearms. There is not much endorsement for Obama, however. One article by David Aaronovitch reminds the reader how Obama called himself a "mutt." All of his pictures are supportive though unlike Palin.

This paper seems very negative about everything. The majority of the comments go toward the conservative. I would call this paper slightly left also.

Even More Left

The Telegraph is more like the Guardian. It has several articles supporting Obama and only one about McCain. One is doubtful of Obama, saying the economy could become worse. Another is predicting an incumbent win for 2012. There is also an article that says "Bye bye Bush," and it has several comical pictures of Bush.

This newspaper is fairly liberal. There is much support for Democrats and criticism for Republicans.

A Fair Newspaper?

This blog has shown conflicting ideas about wether the British media leans left or right. I think a more detailed and individual look at our references is needed to draw an accurate conclusion about the British bias. Skimming from site to site can make one forget what was read in the previous one. Our sources for this blog have been mostly the four websites listed on the blog. We can tackle the Guardian first.

The Guardian has a couple articles listed under their "United States" tab. There are two about Obama and one about Palin. The one about Palin talks mostly about her being a possible candidate in 2012 and some of her explanations for the result of the election. These comments are pretty fair except for one thing. She sounds almost as if she is whining when her comments about being tied to the incumbent are written.

Another article talks about Obama sharing his "Yes we can" motto with a kids tv show. This article has a simple coincidence feel to it. The other is about Obamas foreign policy. It shows how much anticipation there is to see what Obama will do about the Middle East. The article is mostly about the present situation in Iran rather than about Obama.

These articles are pretty fair with a slight lean to the left. McCain does not have an article simply because he lost. This does not show bias.

A Thought

Security is becoming an issue already. Noted in the Guardian, gun sales have sky-rocketed, mail disinfecting systems (anthrax, small pox, ricin, ext.) are becoming more sophisticated, and threats have already been made. What will come of all this? Will something bad happen or will the country really rejoice? The Guardian is not taking any sides here, rather just telling us the foreseen truth as the UK sees it. Just another idea that we will not know the answer unless some devastating event occurs.

Which way is up?

Looking a Kevin's post and my post below shows that the media and the people really do not agree. The media is exclaiming that this was the worst thing that could have happened. Before the final speech, the media was leaining toward the Democratic side. Now the media is leaning away from that, but the people still feel that it was the right choice. Another statement made in the London Times by Chris Ayres " America’s supplies of tissues must have been exhausted during Barack Obama’s 30-minute election broadcast late on Wednesday night. It had been billed as a “closing argument” by the Democrat’s seemingly unstoppable campaign. In reality, it was an all-out, no-holds-barred weepathon with a feel-bad factor pitched somewhere between the third act of Schindler’s List and the slaughter scenes in Watership Down. I emerged from my TV room sodden-eyed and legs trembling, wishing that Iran would just drop the bomb and get it all over with."

The quote above demonstrates the feelings of the media, but is that really what the people think? I believe that there are many mixed feelings now that Obama has been elected, but the people still feel that they may have done the right thing. As shown in Kevin's post below, 73% of the people in UK that took the survey feel good about Obama's presidency. From UK for Obama, "For ANYONE, in particular, UK citizens and US citizens in the UK who want to see real and better change in the US and the world.This is our ONLY REAL chance before climate change takes us to the point of no return.Lets make it happen with Obama." I suppose we shall see what happens or how views and opinions will change as his presidency takes effect.

No Good Feelings So Far....

It seems as though the feelings have changed in UK. "I had hoped for goosebumps and that swollen feeling you get in your chest when you know that something good might happen. But instead I just felt downbeat; not only because of America’s obvious problems but also because of Obama’s willingness to exploit them so mawkishly" (Chris Ayres, The Times). Now that the election has taken place, the speech of our soon to be sworn in president has changed peoples views in UK.

People and the Media Dont Agree

It has become apparent in the last couple of days that the Guardian newspaper leans to the right. The Guardian has made it seem as if America is entering the unknown as had articles on their opinions of the decision. However, it seems the people do not agree with this newpaper. In this poll from the Guardian, it shows that 75% of the people of UK believe that America made the right choice by voting for Obama. The Guardian obviously lean to the right, but they don't necessary speak to the views of the people.

Guardian Newpaper: Found to be the Conservative UK Newpaper

Impressive Win...Why no Celebration

Obama won the US presidency with impressive numbers. He won by a larger margin then almost any non-incumbent president. He won states that have not went democratic in years. He has almost no experience and beat a very experience McCain. He overcame the race barrier. It was an impressive win. Despite these impressive accomplishments, the Guardian newpaper did not have much good to say about it. There was not headline articles talking about these things and pictures were not very flattering. Articles were more talking about, what's going to happen now? This lack of support shows definate bias to the right by the Guardian.

Based on articles from the Guardian: Found to be a Conservative Newspaper

Time to Start Pointing Fingers

After Republican John McCain lost the election, papers are starting to point out mistakes that caused him to lose. There was a couple articles that mentioned Sarah Palin as the one to blame for Obama winning with some recrod numbers. It talks about her obvious lack of knowledge when it comes to major things she should know as a politcal leader, such as geography. She didn't know that Africa was a continent rather then a country and she thought she could see Russia from her house in Alaska. By The Guardian newspaper trying to find excuses for why the Republican lost rather then many celebratory articles for Obama's impressive win, it definatley shows bias to the right.

Based on articles from the Guardian: Found to be a Conservative Newspaper

Obama is Risky Choice

Many of the headlines of the Sun warned of the risks or dangers if Obama is elected president. It talks about the 500 threats already made on Obama and the Neo-Nazi teenagers that plotted to kill Obama and 100 other black people. Here are some of the recent headlines:
Nazi plot to kill US candidate
Barack Obama is no messiah
Obama target of 500 threats
They also talk about how if we elect Obama, America and the whole world will be stepping into the unknown. They make it seem like voting for Obama would be dangerous and risky for the country. I think this shows some bias towards the right.

Taken from headlines of articles in the Sun

The past couple weeks have shown a bias toward Obama. The first three articles on the election page of the times are about Obama. Three out of four of the editor picks are about Obama on the Guardian's website. I do see photo galleries that show a fair distribution of Obama and McCain, but headlines are the proof in the pudding. This does make sense since policy in the UK is more liberal than the US.

John who?

So far, keeping track of the London Times there are six times as many articles about Obama's sucess in the debates and in his daily life than there are about McCain. Well, actually the London Times have not produced one article about McCain that promote any of his " intellectual ideas". The last five arcticles in the Times are about Obama and how well he is doing. The last article about the Republicans was a documentary about the Saturday Night Live mocking of Sarah Palin by Tina Fey. One can clearly see the London Times "quietly" rooting on Obama's success.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4972525.ece

I believe that there is major bias in the media towards Obama. It seems as they are running out of things to talk about so they began to tear into the Republicans outfits. Sarah Palin is being ridiculed for the large costs of her outfits. I havent seen any reports of how much Obama's outfits cost?

Debate Does Not Conclude Bias

Most UK papers did show Obama as the winner of the last debate. However, this does not necessarily indicate bias. I watched the debate, and Obama seemed to keep his emotions under control much better than McCain. Many people base their decisions on speaking abilities and facial expressions. Based on those parameters, I would also say that Obama won the debate. McCain would stray off topic and interrupt Obama often during the debate. This shows his inability to keep his composure under fire. Anyone who comes to this same conclusion is not necessarily showing bias. Now, whether one should vote based on a candidates composure or on the issues is a whole different topic.

I have seen a similar pattern on the Telegraph videos. The preview pictures shown for videos have Obama usualy standing in front of american flags looking like a patriotic leader. While the pictures representing McCain are goofy looking or unflattering. It is clear that the Telegraph and London Times have similar ideals.

Picture Speaks 1000 Words

These are all the pictures of the two presidential candidates and vice presidential candidates found on main pages of the London Times on Friday, 10/17/08. As you can see, all the pictures of McCain and Palin are very goofy looking and unflattering. In the cartoon it shows McCain with a goofy face and Obama serious. It seems like the papers are making the Republican candidates out to be a joke while the Democratic ones are serious. Shows alot of bias to the Democrats.

Pictures all taken from front page of the US Elections Section of the London Times on 10/17

Working Man vs. The Average Joe

Both The Sun and the London Times do show biased to the Democratic side. There are some substantial differences between the two papers. The Sun is described more for the "average joe" due to its article on "bookies" paying out 1 mil euros betting that Barak Obama will win the election. The article shows no substantial information about the debate, just the interesting activities going on around the debate. The London Times on the other hand shows a much more conservative approach for the business man, but still leans toward the Democratic. This is shown by headlining picture of McCain with his tongue out. The article "Barack Obama surge gives John McCain the jitters" describes how Obama makes McCain nervous with several states now leaning to Obama's side in which McCain took for granted earlier in this debate period.

McCain was the Loser

The general consensus in every UK newspaper that I looked at said that McCain lost the final debate. I find this helpful in seeing who the UK is biased towards. It seems that people always think that their candidate did better in the debates. You ask a republican who did better and they will say McCain, ask a Democrat they will say Obama. Since every paper said Obama was the clear winner, it shows some bias towards Obama and the Democrats.

Based on Headlines from all the major newspapers in the UK including the London Times, The Sun and the London Telegraph.