Posted on 03/20/2005 11:31:59 AM PST by kevin fortuna
To judge from the e-mails I received during the four years I spent on the White House beat, Post readers of all political ideologies agree: I am biased.
But in which direction?
A conservative magazine put me on its cover as "Dana 'Bias' Milbank." A liberal Web site made me its "Media Whore of the Week," and a posting on a liberal blog proposed "Whore" as my middle name. (I've decided to combine the "Bias" and "Whore" suggestions and make my middle name, simply, "Bore.")
In political journalism, complaints from ideologically driven readers come with the territory; sometimes I've gotten dueling complaints that I have betrayed my conservative and liberal biases in the same story. But I think the growing volume and the vitriol of the bias accusations are part of a new -- and dangerous -- development.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
See my post number 20.
The media has a built in "democratic party" bias, not necessarily a "liberal" bias. Most so-called liberals, are much further to the left than even the main stream of the democratic party. This is why they think Fox is extremely right wing and the MSM still to the right of where they sit.
The media is not fundamentally philosophical, they are however accurately described as members of the democratic party.
No, I'm saying O'Reilly does the "one conservative criticized me and one liberal criticized me, therefore I'm balanced" routine.
PS--at the end if the sentence I wrote "and vice versa"--both libs and conservatives do it.
I believe Dana in this about as much as I believe his writing. . . not very much. I've never heard anyone say that he was biased in any but anti-American, Bush-hating, vitriolic liberal way!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.