The cable network C-Span was set up in 1979 by Brian Lamb.  Lamb is still the main manager/director.  C-Span is an acronym for Cable-Satellite Public Affairs Network.
The original mission of C-Span was to broadcast Congress in session, and other governmental affairs.  It expanded its programming to include events at universities, think tanks, and other publically oriented institutions.  C-Span also interviews politicians, public policy anaylists, authors, and journalists.
In the war over political biases in media, C-Span is often lauded for it's neutrality.  However, I don't believe it deserves this commendation any longer.
I have monitored C-Span for several years and I believe it shows a right-wing or conservative bias.  Coverage of events at right-wing institutes, such as AEI, Cato, and Heritage, outweighs coverage of events at decidedly left-wing, or liberal, institutions be a margin of about 3 to 1. 
Brian Lamb's guests are much more likely to come from a right-ward point of view than a left one.  To give C-Span credit, they are the only ones who will carry a speech by Noam Chomsky or Ralph Nader.  Lamb has had both these men as guests.  But he seems to go out of his way to schedule more of the time guests such as Thomas Friedman, Anne Applebaum, or Daniel Pipes.
C-Span's bias is rarely called into question by the Left, and it's high time it should be.
Here is an article from a few years ago on the FAIR website.  What John Cowan says here holds true today.
http://www.fair.org/extra/0007/cspan.html
As Cowan points out, Lamb's U.S. history agenda is quite iconographic, patriarchal, and top-down.  It's what I would call "patriotic" history, rather than investigative history.  You can almost hear the skyrockets bursting on some Book TV weekends.
::)

C-Span ? Biased ?

Nah.........

::)

If it's anything like the Canadian version (C-PAC)  it's probally more boring than watching vacation slides....  ::)

C-Span is biased
Fox News isn't

::) ;D

C-Span is biased
Fox News isn't

::) ;D


Apples and oranges, my friend, apples and oranges....  ::)  ;D

I'm not sure how C-Span fills its schedule, but I do know the network of right-wing "think tanks" are far better organized for media saturation than anything the Left has sputtering along.  From Hoover Foundation in Berkeley to the Hudson Institute in NY, from American Enterprise to Heritage, this right-wing cabal has something going on somewhere any day at any hour.  I allow for the possibility that these outfits serenade C-Span for constant coverage.
If the Left could get its act together the way the Right has over the last few decades, they could compete better for C-Span's favors.
Brian Lamb might argue that it's not his bidding to seek out Left-wing groups to court.

Right-of-center authors and pundits are tied in with the same right-wing foundations.  That's probably how they get on the C-Span so much more often.

If you look at the so-called "experts" who appear as guests on news programs, you will notice they are likely to be affiliated with the right-wing think tanks and the industry lobbies.  The Heritage Foundation, for instance, has stories-to-go, complete with the experts, the footage, the who, the what, the when, and the where.  When broadcast news outlets are slashing budgets for reporting, such ready-mades become economical and attractive.
This partially explains the pro-business, pro-military bias common to all commercial news outlets.

C-Span is funded by the cable companies, not advertising, but I think some of the same principles apply.  The right-wing spin machine is much more facile and efficient than starting from scratch.

You will notice FOX News does next to no investigative reporting.  It's all verbatim propaganda from Wall Street and Republican PR firms.  But that's FOX's raison d'etre.

I think C-Span chooses prefab due to budget exigencies and time constraints.

I'm with Jamie,

If C-Span is anything like CNBC, BBC News, Fox News or any of the other channels we get from overseas then it has to be more boring than watching (other people's) vacation slides.  ::)

I'm with Jamie,

If C-Span is anything like CNBC, BBC News, Fox News or any of the other channels we get from overseas then it has to be more boring than watching (other people's) vacation slides.  ::)

With all the hub-bub about on-air profanity, I noticed nobody complained to authorities about numerous four-letter words that get through on C-Span.  I figured that's because C-Span watchers are too busy snoring to hear them!
;D

Most of C-Span's programming is desperately dull.  BUT, when C-Span is not dull, its programming is either enriching or infuriating.  That's why I always surf by the C-Span channels to see what's on.

With all the hub-bub about on-air profanity, I noticed nobody complained to authorities about numerous four-letter words that get through on C-Span.  I figured that's because C-Span watchers are too busy snoring to hear them!
;D

Most of C-Span's programming is desperately dull.  BUT, when C-Span is not dull, its programming is either enriching or infuriating.  That's why I always surf by the C-Span channels to see what's on.


what? CSPAN Dull?  I remember sitting in the Student Government office while a few senators were watching CSPAN...the only problem is, they were airing a picture of the Senate floor (empty) with the words: "waiting for senators to come to vote".  This screen stayed on for at least four hours.  I didnt stay there for all four hours...no, in the middle I left, went to class and came back.  Yes, and the same people were still glued to the screen. 

I'm with Jamie,

If C-Span is anything like CNBC, BBC News, Fox News or any of the other channels we get from overseas then it has to be more boring than watching (other people's) vacation slides.  ::)


One day in the future... Vacation Slide TV... The second most boring channel in history !  ::)

I like C-Span, mostly the Washington Journal and watching the house of representatives or the senate (whichever one is talking about what interests me more) debate.

I believe this is the first time I've ever read/heard anyone call C-Span biased.

I like C-Span, mostly the Washington Journal and watching the house of representatives or the senate (whichever one is talking about what interests me more) debate.

I believe this is the first time I've ever read/heard anyone call C-Span biased.

There has to be some reason why it isn't under constant attack from Bill O'Reilly, Brent Bozell, Bernie Goldberg, and the rest of the we-hate-the-truth blowhards.

I really can't say if it is left or right leaning because I don't watch it too much. One thing I do like about it is when they are showing debates/conventions/speeches, etc. they don't have ANY commentary-just show it to you. What I hate about network news-especially with a speech, first the anchorperson will tell you what will be said, then it will be said, then the anchorperson will tell you what was just said.  ::) At least C-Span DOESN'T do that. And I also like that they have people's opinion through phone calls.





Cat

I really can't say if it is left or right leaning because I don't watch it too much. One thing I do like about it is when they are showing debates/conventions/speeches, etc. they don't have ANY commentary-just show it to you. What I hate about network news-especially with a speech, first the anchorperson will tell you what will be said, then it will be said, then the anchorperson will tell you what was just said.  ::) At least C-Span DOESN'T do that. And I also like that they have people's opinion through phone calls.





Cat


"C-Span is the only place you can watch the entire democratic/republican national conventions in Boston/New York without debate or commentary."

To meany people, "biased" means "anybody that does not support my position".

I have seen CSPAN, and frankly I tend to find it as exciting as watching paint dry.  But I also see their commentary reports, which seem to cover both sides.  From what I have seen, they are roughly 40% liberal, 40% conservative, and 20% neutral.