Not a pure lie...maybe a half truth. The guests he has on the show are fairly well mixed (conservative v liberal). Bill takes the conservative position about 3 out of 4 times...but at least the liberal position is vocalized.
In contrast, the networks typically offer one position in a given news piece, with liberal positions outnumbering conservatives maybe 2:1. Exceptions like Tim Russert exist but they are uncommon. The 3 journalists (all having admitted being liberal in viewpoint but denying in colors their broadcast) I cited do not do so many interviews..there liberal flavor is best tasted in the type of stories covered (they each have extensive editorial control of their respective networks), with excessive dwelling on negative (for the admin) stories and ignoring many positive stories. To some extent this can be blamed on "bad news sells" but the contrast with Fox is striking. I would also add if bad news really does sell, good news must sell better because Fox is growing yearly in market share.
Bias is in the eye of the beholder...what I see as bias will not be what you see. What you see as bias, I will not see, as clearly at least. But I CAN recognise that YOU see it. Fox stands out to liberals as right wing in part because no alternative from the network/CNN perspective has been offered for so many years. I see Fox as MUCH closer to a balanced perspective in at least VOCALIZING the left viewpoint, even if the commentator disagrees. IMO but not yours I suppose it is shocking that networks have remained so incredibly one sided to the point that I wonder how they got away with it unchecked for so long. It is good to have alternatives, right wing or left...keeps BOTH sides honast.
