68 pro-Israeli, 27 pro-Arab, and 49 politically neutral undergraduates viewed identical samples of major network TV coverage of the Beirut massacre and rated them as being biased against their side. Results indicate that the hostile media phenomenon appears to involve the operation of 2 separate mechanisms. Ss evaluated the fairness of the media's sample of facts and arguments differently, in light of their own divergent views about the objective merits of each side's case and their corresponding views about the nature of unbiased coverage. Ss also reported different perceptions and recollections about the program content itself; that is, each group reported more negative references to their side than positive ones, and each predicted that the coverage would sway nonpartisans in a hostile direction. Within both partisan groups, furthermore, greater knowledge of the crisis was associated with stronger perceptions of media bias. It is concluded that charges of media bias may reflect more than self-serving attempts to secure preferential treatment. They may result from the operation of basic cognitive and perceptual mechanisms that should prove relevant to perceptions of fairness or objectivity in a wide range of mediation and negotiation contexts.(11 ref)(PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)