I find polite disagreement on the blogosphere so exciting that I honored it with its own post. "Midwest Product" commented on my recent post about the Center. I don't answer all the objections, because that doesn't seem very conversational. I think I hit the main point.
I am grateful to learn that belief in a left-leaning MSM is now the CW.
It is of course only fair that I identify symptoms before diagnosing a disease. I gave no that the MSM leans liberal, then proceeded to explain why that might be. It’s a bit of shorthand. I have covered evidence for it in earlier posts, and did not attempt a proof of the idea here. I had this UCLA study in my first draft, but I’ve been trying to edit for length after the overlong piece on the religious left a few days ago.
For single instances of bias evidence, go here and here.
For more in depth cataloging of bias, there is, again, the Media Research Center, Accuracy in Media, and Center for Media and Public Affairs, each of which links to other sites.
There are also the books by Bernard Goldberg and Bob Kohn.
The main books taking the opposite POV, that the media does not list left, I mention here, with my objections. And earlier posts here and here touch on similar media issues.
You are correct that location does not necessarily cause belief, nor does having an opinion necessarily mean that one cannot report objectively. My starting point, based on the sources above and my own observations over the last 30 years, was that the slant exists, and I speculated why that might be.