Given the extremely large pool of events and stories available, media outlets need to focus on a subset of issues and aspects to convey to their audience. Outlets are often accused of exhibiting a systematic bias in this selection process, with different outlets portraying different versions of reality. However, in the absence of objective measures and empirical evidence, the direction and extent of systematicity remains widely disputed. In this paper we propose a framework based on quoting patterns for quantifying and characterizing the degree to which media outlets exhibit systematic bias. We apply this framework to a massive dataset of news articles spanning the six years of Obama's presidency and all of his speeches, and reveal that a systematic pattern does indeed emerge from the outlet's quoting behavior. Moreover, we show that this pattern can be successfully exploited in an unsupervised prediction setting, to determine which new quotes an outlet will select to broadcast. By encoding bias patterns in a low-rank space we provide an analysis of the structure of political media coverage. This reveals a latent media bias space that aligns surprisingly well with political ideology and outlet type. A linguistic analysis exposes striking differences across these latent dimensions, showing how the different types of media outlets portray different realities even when reporting on the same events. For example, outlets mapped to the mainstream conservative side of the latent space focus on quotes that portray a presidential persona disproportionately characterized by negativity.
Language and ideology Recently, natural language processing techniques were applied to identify ideologies in a variety of large scale text collections, including congressional debates @cite_7 @cite_10 , presidential debates @cite_15 , academic papers @cite_1 , books @cite_30 , and Twitter posts @cite_9 @cite_13 @cite_3 . All this work operates on a predefined dimension of -- political ideology using known slant labels; in the news media domain slant is seldom declared or proven with certainty and thus we need to resort to an unsupervised methodology.
@cite_30 @cite_13 @cite_7 @cite_9 @cite_1 @cite_3 @cite_15 @cite_10
2251738400 560287614 2250773804 1508666480
An individual’s words often reveal their political ideology. Existing automated techniques to identify ideology from text focus on bags of words or wordlists, ignoring syntax. Taking inspiration from recent work in sentiment analysis that successfully models the compositional aspect of language, we apply a recursive neural network (RNN) framework to the task of identifying the political position evinced by a sentence. To show the importance of modeling subsentential elements, we crowdsource political annotations at a phrase and sentence level. Our model outperforms existing models on our newly annotated dataset and an existing dataset. We seek to measure political candidates’ ideological positioning from their speeches. To accomplish this, we infer ideological cues from a corpus of political writings annotated with known ideologies. We then represent the speeches of U.S. Presidential candidates as sequences of cues and lags (filler distinguished only by its length in words). We apply a domain-informed Bayesian HMM to infer the proportions of ideologies each candidate uses in each campaign. The results are validated against a set of preregistered, domain expertauthored hypotheses. Previous work on extracting ideology from text has focused on domains where expression of political views is expected, but it’s unclear if current technology can work in domains where displays of ideology are considered inappropriate. We present a supervised ensemble n-gram model for ideology extraction with topic adjustments and apply it to one such domain: research papers written by academic economists. We show economists’ political leanings can be correctly predicted, that our predictions generalize to new domains, and that they correlate with public policy-relevant research findings. We also present evidence that unsupervised models can under-perform in domains where ideological expression is discouraged. Polarizing discussions on political and social issues are common in mass and user-generated media. However, computer-based understanding of ideological discourse has been considered too difficult to undertake. In this paper we propose a statistical model for ideology discourse. By ideology we mean "a set of general beliefs socially shared by a group of people." For example, Democratic and Republican are two major political ideologies in the United States. The proposed model captures lexical variations due to an ideological text's topic and due to an author or speaker's ideological perspective. To cope with the non-conjugacy of the logistic-normal prior we derive a variational inference algorithm for the model. We evaluate the proposed model on synthetic data as well as a written and a spoken political discourse. Experimental results strongly support that ideological perspectives are reflected in lexical variations.