I would contend that bias has to do more with interpretation of facts, than of facts themselves (although, obviously, you can create bias through selective pres

I would contend that bias has to do more with interpretation of facts, than of facts themselves (although, obviously, you can create bias through selective presentation of facts as well). Basically, it reduces to which side of the is-ought dichotomy (Hume) a statement falls on. Anything on the 'is' side is fair game. Anything on the ought side is opinion (which is fine), but should not be enforced. An example of bias might be a professor positing (outside an econ class) that we should bail out the auto industry. That statement, while on its face reasonable, implicitly assumes a number of 'positive rights' that most conservatives don't grant. It further assumes that a bailout is the best way to guarantee those positive rights, which is outside the purview of anything but an economics class. Improper bias may be the teacher grading assignments disagreeing with his thesis (and its implicit liberal assumptions) more harshly than papers agreeing with his thesis. Obviously, this would be very hard to show - but if it is happening, it would be extremely bad. And honestly, you'd have to be a complete moron to think there is right wing bias in american universities. Liberal professors outnumber conservative professors at least 5 to 1 (far more in some departments/schools). As proof see http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8427-2005Mar28.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8427-2005Mar2... or http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/10/08/politics http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/10/08/politics. Or any other survey conducted on the topic.