Citation

Publication Date: 2007-08-01
Format: Working Paper
Bibliography: Daniel E. Ho and Kevin M. Quinn, Assessing Political Positions of Media, Stanford Law and Economics Olin Working Paper, No. 343 (2007).

More

Although central to understanding the role of the media, few quantitative measures of the political positions of media exist. Collecting and classifying editorials adopted by 23 major U.S. newspapers on 495 Supreme Court cases from 1994-2004, we apply an item response theoretic approach to place newspapers on a substantively meaningful - and long validated - scale of political preferences. Our results provide significant insights into the study of the media. We show that 17 of the 23 papers are more likely to the left of the median Justice for this period, but also find considerable evidence that this may be an artifact of the liberalness of urban, elite, high circulation papers.

Other publications by this author

View All

• Reconciling Punitive Damages Evidence
  2010-01-01
• Did Liberal Justices Invent the Standing Doctrine? An Empirical Study of the Evolution of Standing, 1921-2006
  2010-01-01
• Measuring Agency Preferences: Experts, Voting, and the Power of Chairs
  2010-01-01
• Did a Switch in Time Save Nine?
  2010-01-01
• The Role of Theory and Evidence in Media Regulation and Law: A Response to Baker and a Defense of Empirical Legal
  2009-10-01
• Viewpoint Diversity and Media Consolidation: An Empirical Study
  2009-04-01
• Evaluating Course Evaluations: An Empirical Analysis of a Quasi-Experiment at the Stanford Law School, 2000-2007
  2009-04-01
• Measuring Explicit Political Positions of Media
  2008-10-29
• Improving the Presentation and Interpretation of Online Ratings Data with Model-based Figures
  2008-07-01
• MatchIt: Nonparametric Preprocessing for Parametric Causal Inference
  2008-02-01