Media Bias Study Reveals Sharp Increase in Anti-Conservative Labeling

A comprehensive analysis of American newspaper language over the past six decades has uncovered a significant imbalance in how political ideologies are characterized, with conservative viewpoints far more likely to be labeled as “extreme” than their liberal counterparts—a trend that dramatically intensified between 2021 and 2025.

The research, which appeared in Townhall.com last month, examined the frequency of politically charged descriptors in roughly 2,900 American newspapers from 1961 to 2025. Despite the relatively even electoral success between Republicans and Democrats during this period, the study found consistent disparities in how newspapers framed political positions.

By searching through Newspapers.com’s extensive database, researchers tracked four pairs of parallel political descriptors: “far right” vs. “far left,” “extreme right” vs. “extreme left,” “right-wing extremist” vs. “left-wing extremist,” and “ultra-conservative” vs. “ultra-liberal.”

The results revealed substantial disparities across all categories. Throughout the entire period studied, conservatives were 45% more likely to be branded as “far right” than liberals were to be called “far left.” The gap widened with more explicitly political terms—conservatives were 78% more likely to be labeled “extreme right” than liberals were to be called “extreme left.”

Most striking was the disparity between “right-wing extremist” and “left-wing extremist.” The analysis found that conservative positions were five times more likely to be characterized as “extremist” compared to liberal viewpoints over the six-decade period.

While this imbalance gradually increased over time, the data shows a dramatic acceleration during the 2021-2025 period. During these most recent five years, the ratio between “far right” and “far left” usage jumped to nearly 4:1, and the term “right-wing extremist” appeared a staggering seventeen times more frequently than “left-wing extremist.”

Political observers have noted this trend coincides with heightened political polarization in American society. Dr. James Harrington, a media studies professor at Georgetown University not involved in the research, commented: “These findings raise important questions about media framing and its potential impact on public perception of political ideologies. Language choices in news reporting can subtly shape how readers perceive different political positions.”

The researchers hypothesize that several factors may have contributed to the dramatic increase in disparate labeling during 2021-2025, including the January 6 congressional hearings and what they describe as “the Biden administration’s anti-free speech censorship efforts.” However, they acknowledge that additional research would be necessary to establish definitive causal relationships.

The study comes amid ongoing debates about media bias and the influence of language in political discourse. Media watchdog groups have frequently highlighted concerns about terminology in news reporting, though they differ sharply on the nature and extent of bias in mainstream outlets.

Despite the persistent linguistic imbalance identified in the study, conservatism remains a significant political force in America. The researchers suggest this resilience may stem from the fact that “personal experience is a better teacher than propaganda,” indicating that media framing may have limits in its ability to shift deeply-held political convictions.

As concerns about political polarization continue to dominate public discourse, this research provides quantitative evidence of how language in mainstream newspapers has evolved over time. The findings contribute to ongoing conversations about media literacy, journalistic standards, and the responsibility of news organizations to present political viewpoints with balance and fairness.

The full dataset from the study has been made publicly available online for further analysis and verification.