Bias? What Bias?

Media companies are companies, and must therefore, since they are companies, be "right-wing". So big media conglomerates, like Time Warner, must therefore have a "right-wing" bias in their publications, if any at all.

So have a look at Time Warner's political contributions, which should shock no-one except the kind of ardent leftist who spouts the above theory. (Who will instead simply ignore all conflicting data.)

In 2004, for example, Time Warner gave $703,689 to Republicans and $2,201,163 to Democrats -- in other words, Time Warner gave more than three times as much to Democrats.

Does that sound like the actions of

(a) an impartial observer of elections,
(b) someone who is trying to get Democrats elected, or
(c) someone who is trying to get Republicans elected?

That the answer is (b) seems obvious to me. I suppose, if you could argue their views didn't seep into their articles (and keep a straight face), you could somehow favor (a). But (c)? It takes a very, very special person -- I believe the current favored terms are "reality-based" and "progressive" -- to conclude (c), in the face of data like this.