Public disclosure: Media are finally admitting their biases.

Express news ^ | 08/13/04 | Ken Rodriguez

[Pikamax]

Ken Rodriguez: Public disclosure: Media are finally admitting their biases

Web Posted: 08/13/2004 12:00 AM CDT

San Antonio Express-News

Some years ago, professional wrestling unmasked itself. The circus sport of body slams and flying drop kicks admitted what everyone had known all along: The blows are fake, the matches are rigged, wrestlers win and lose according to script.

Today, bit by bit, the media also are unmasking themselves. In one disclosure after another, the media are admitting what many have known all along: Most of those who report and edit the news hold liberal points of view.

Consider these recent admissions:

On July 25, the New York Times headlined a story with a question: Is the Times a liberal paper?

The 1,707-word story began with these words: "Of course it is."

Public editor Daniel Okrent began the piece by addressing "the flammable stuff that ignites the right" — gay rights, gun control, abortion and environmental regulation.

"And if you think the Times plays it down the middle on any of them," Okrent wrote, "you've been reading the paper with your eyes closed."

On June 3, the Christian Science Monitor ran this headline: "Newsroom conservatives are a rare breed."

The newspaper reported a survey showing that only 7 percent of national reporters, editors and media executives consider themselves conservative.

David Yarnold, editor and vice president of the San Jose Mercury News, told the Christian Science Monitor, "We should acknowledge that maybe the biggest problem is that most of us think too much alike and come from the same backgrounds. Find the pro-lifers in a newsroom. That's harder than finding Waldo."

On April 19, the Dallas Morning News penned an editorial headlined, "Unvarnished truth? Perception of bias undermines media."

The Morning News wrote, "It's time that we in the Fourth Estate admit that liberal media bias isn't a figment of Rush Limbaugh's imagination.

"Studies by the American Society of Newspaper Editors, the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Knight Foundation have shown that, on average, journalists are much more politically and culturally liberal and secular than their readers."

The admissions are important. Poll after poll shows that public trust in the media is waning. One reason is the perception that stories are presented with a slant to the left.

Sometimes the bias is subtle. In a 2001 Washington Post editorial about the "liberal" media, Robert J. Samuelson wrote, "Some groups and ideas are treated well in coverage, because they seem praiseworthy and 'right.' Others are disdained, because they seem questionable, undesirable or 'fringe.'"

Sometimes liberal bias is obvious. A Roper Poll of 139 Washington bureau chiefs and correspondents in 1992 showed that 89 percent had voted for Bill Clinton, 7 percent for George Bush.

"Margins of victory that lopsided are rarely seen this side of Syria," wrote Charles Krauthammer of the Washington Post.

This isn't to suggest a vast left-wing conspiracy. The New York Times, Newsweek and CNN do not convene daily to see how they can put a liberal spin on stories.

Indeed, many journalists are skilled at reporting two sides of an issue. But a reporter's views can sometimes be detected in presentation, in the emphasis of certain facts and quotes and in a story's ending.

Many correctly note that there are prominent conservative media voices, such as Fox News and the Rush Limbaughs of talk radio.

Many would point out that the Washington Post just acknowledged an imbalance of reporting that benefited President Bush on the decision to go to war.

And many reporters would say they can check their political leanings at the door.

Clearly some can, but why were so many on their feet, giving Sen. John Kerry standing ovations at a recent conference for minority journalists?

And why were so many snickering — or strangely silent — when President Bush spoke?

I would not have cheered — I'm not crazy about either candidate — but I might have smiled.

Because, intentionally or not, the media are peeling off a mask to reveal their bias.

[tiki]

I don't care if they are liberal but I do care about the bias. Who, what, when, where, how? Just the news. I can figure out what to think all by my little, bitty self.

[Little Ray]

Uh, Rush Limbaugh exists to sell advertising at "confiscatory rates." He does this by presenting a show that combats the overwhelming liberal bias in all areas of the news media.

[gunnedah]

I am for a Revolution of any kind and I would prefer it be peaceable but there is no way to control that bunch in DC.
No doubt term limits and controlling donations would about answer the problem. Along with not allowing them to practice before the government for a number of years after getting out of office.
But they don't do as we say anyway and do you really think if the public really wanted term limits they would pass the law. They control the whole situation and there is no stopping to them without something drastic happening.
They have too many incentives and reasons to stay.

[Rightly Biased]

Uh, Rush Limbaugh exists to sell advertising at "confiscatory rates." "

Uh, Is there a problem with that? If he can get away with charging those rates, and advertisers will pay those rates? What gives? I love capitalism!! Rush is the most listened to talk radio personality ever and advertisers know that.

[Little Ray]

No, just that he doesn't exist to balance the the left-wing bias in the media. He gets to charge confiscatory rates 'cause he offered a nearly unique product (unabashedly conservative commentary) when he started and still has the best "brand recognition."

[jays911]

the latest spin is that while we claim that the "mainstream" media are leftist biased, the left claims a right-wing spin. there was a piece about it on morning edition on national people's radio this am. see below:

http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/

[Salvation]

**Because, intentionally or not, the media are peeling off a mask to reveal their bias.**

Slowly but surely we are learn who

ABCNNBCBS
abd bytlatwp

really are.

[Rightly Biased]

So are the rates "confiscatory"? or are the advertisers getting thier moneys worth?

[Little Ray]

They must think they are getting their money's worth or they wouldn't buy the spot!
I sure wish I had more time to listen to Rush!

[Rightly Biased]

I go into withdrawals if I'm on vacation from work and out with the Fam. Mrs. Rightly Biased says he talks to fast for her and when she gets it He's on to another subject (so as a Fam we don't listen much)

[listenhillary]

Bump and bookmarked

[farmfriend]

bttt

[Little Ray]

I have to rely on Nealz News; I'm in an office and I have to answer a phone sometimes.