Beyond that, the Right has an “advocacy journalism” culture that is unparalleled in the MSM that is generally ascribed to the Left. When the facts don't fit the right-wing point of view, “The facts are biased” as Colbert would mockingly say. In the UK, Murdoch's paper the Sun has openly declared for the Conservative party and admitted their goal of taking down Labour. This is in no way news, it is pure propaganda. No honest review of the current media landscape could conclude that this trait exists equally on left and right.

let's say for argument that people on the left do look at more news sources, are they looking at more news sources that just conform to their own options? if so what is the benefit other than more reinforcement?

the greater problem is that if you are a liberal or conservative you should be able to have a reasonable expectation that the mainstream outlet that you choose will actually show the news in a relatively unbiased manner, and not slant everything in one direction. most people don't have the time or bandwidth to source multiple news outlets for unbiased truth behind the spin. it might be, (although i haven't seen proof) that right wing news outlets have more of this slant but is it the fault of an average conservative who watches 1-2 news outlets that his channels are serving him falsified information, or is it the responsibility of the news outlets to provide a balanced view.

Yes, there isn't complete conformity and adherence to reason on both sides, but the Left is far more likely to believe and know things that are objectively true when it comes to the political sphere. The Right doesn't care to, they are happy with empty vessels like Palin and buzzwords like, “Freedom” and “Real.”

There are examples on the left, but it is disingenuous to suggest that this is equal on both sides as the MSM constantly tries to push.

the problem is just as much the news source. we can't assume people are going to search multiple news outlets to fact check information and people generally watch news that confirms their beliefs anyway. so if i'm a conservative and i rely on Fox News, as a reasonable person I should assume that the “news” is factual. the same goes for liberals who only watch MSNBC.

If Keith Olberman suddenly started to pound on the fact that rabbits cause cancer, the uninformed liberals who only watch MSNBC would start throwing their rabbits out into a field.

I should've included this link in the last comment, but I thought you'd realize the error of your ways more easily
http://people-press.org/report/319/public-knowl...

What I love in this report is that Daily Show and Colbert viewers are the smartest.

I do realize that all of this has a lot to do with a person's “trusted sources.” If you trust Bush, FOX and Glen Beck you are more likely to think climate change is a hoax and any scientist who says otherwise, especially via a UN report, is full of crap. But on the later point, they are objectively wrong and unwilling to listen to any reason…unless it comes from Palin or Glen Beck of course.