I have previously criticized the methodology of the Groseclose/Milyo media bias study (PDF). But at the end of a diatribe attacking it on the American Progress website, Eric Alterman takes a cheap shot at the authors:
Check the fine print and one finds this study -- naively touted as both objective and significant by the UCLA public affairs office and published, inexplicably, by the previously respected Quarterly Journal of Economics, edited at Harvard University's Department of Economics -- was the product of a significant investment by right-wing think tanks. In 2000-2001, Groseclose was a Hoover Institution national fellow, while Milyo has been granted $40,500 from the American Enterprise Institute; both were Heritage Foundation Salvatori fellows in 1997.
This phrasing suggests that the funding Groseclose and Milyo received from Hoover and AEI supported this paper. But as the authors make clear, their home universities (UCLA and Missouri-St. Louis, respectively) "paid our salaries, funded our research assistants, and paid for services such as Lexis-Nexis, which were necessary for our data collection. No other organization or person helped to fund this research project." They even went so far as to choose research assistants "so that approximately half our data was coded by Gore supporters and half by Bush supporters." Alterman's attack is misleading. Yes, Groseclose and Milyo have been associated with conservative groups, but that doesn't mean that all their research is "the product" of those groups.
Update 1/12: I'm currently discussing the study on KTLK 100.3 in Minnesota.