HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Mar 17, 2004 And so I re-christen the Old Grey Lady. For years I have been arguing with my liberal friends about the possibility that Bias exists in the Media. They say that Journalists are Objective, while I contend that Journalists are Human. So who is right? Me, obviously…but here’s why. If you are one who thinks that the Media (i.e., Humans) are not biased, two news items have appeared recently that should at least begin to put this issue to rest. Since I have a soft mushy spot in my heart for the New York Times, and they happen to be at the top of my Biased Liberal Media Elite list, I’ve chosen to pick on them here. Early this year I came across the first of my two favorite examples of Bias in the Media. Specifically, a number of articles began appearing about a new journalistic strategy at the Old Red Lady (i.e., the New York Times). They decided, in their great wisdom, that they would begin to devote a beat reporter to a very strange animal…the Conservative. By virtue of my highly-placed sources in the Times news room (ok fine, it’s really just my imagination) I was able to obtain this transcript of a Super-Secret Liberal Cabal Meeting: That’s right Ladies and Gentlemen, step right up! The line forms to the Left! Come see the 8th Wonder of the World! We call this beast ‘Conservative’! Never in the history of the Upper West Side has such an amazing specimen of logical and rational thought been captured for display. We think that our loyal readers would be most interested in hearing about the strange and sometimes-frightening habits of this newly discovered Wonder. What brings on this bit of playful sarcasm? It was reported at the Observer that (http://www2.observer.com/observer/pages/offthere c.asp): “For the next year, David Kirkpatrick—formerly the man charged with covering the book publishing industry—will cover conservatives. Not the Republican Party or the Bush administration. No, it’s real conservatives.” Amazing. While it’s hard to miss the humor in this, the full extent of the hilarity comes only upon see the actual coverage. Here is a list of the first four article titles as referenced on New Criterion’s blog ‘Armavirumque’ (http://www.newcriterion.com/weblog/armavirumque. html): A Concerned Bloc of Republicans Wonders Whether Bush Is Conservative Enough (January 25), Conservative Groups Differ On Bush Words on Marriage (January 21), Bush's Push for Marriage Falls Short for Conservatives (January 15), Bush Plans $1.5 Billion Drive for Promotion of Marriage (January 14). Thank God that the NYT finally decided to keep us informed about those wacky Conservatives. It seems that Bush just isn’t making ‘those people’ happy. But please keep this point firmly in mind: The Media is most certainly not Biased! On to the second bit of conclusive proof that the media treats all sides equally. Just today I found an interesting letter published on the blog ‘Petrelis Files’ (3/15/04 at http://www.mpetrelis.blogspot.com/2004_03_14_mpet relis_archive.html#107938116393760600). This document includes a list of individuals employed by the Times who gave money to politicians and political causes. While this is apparently against the standards defined in the “Ethical Journalism handbook,” I don’t personally have a huge problem with Journalists giving money to political causes or even to politicians. It’s actually a convenient way to keep tabs on where they Biases lie. I implore each and every person who 1) reads this article and 2) listens to/reads anything in the Media to follow the link above and check this list out for yourself. I’ll give you a brief summary right now (and you might want to sit down for this revelation). The amazing, astounding, overwhelming, mind-numbingly- lopsided majority of donations went to Democrats. It’s a long list, so you’ll have to check it out for yourself. As a bit of insult to injured Bias, the very last donation listed is: Sulzberger, Judith F.; Iphigene’s daughter 10/29/92 Clinton/Gore 92 General Election Compliance Fund (D) $1,000 09/24/92 DNC Services Corporation (D) $2,000 06/24/92 Clinton for President Committee (D) $1,000 06/29/91 People for Mrazek Senatorial Campaign Committee (D) $1,000 06/06/90 Republican Pro-Choice PAC (R) $350 Granted, Judith is only family of an employee… but I thought the identity of the ‘Republican’ cause was pretty telling. I hope that those who have shut their eyes and covered their ears to the cries of ‘Bias in the Media’ in the past will take this opportunity to get in touch with reality. The truth is simple: There will ALWAYS be Bias in the Media because it is a HUMAN INSTITUTION. There is nothing inherently wrong with Bias. The problem is the existence of Bias that is consistently slanted in one direction. There is yet hope. The internet, and specifically the Blog, has begun the process of both exposing the current Bias in the traditional media and providing a source of information so vast and varied that Left- and Right-Leaning Biases have the potential to cancel the other out. With any luck the Truth will begin to replace Bias. ------------ About the author: Tom is a conservative medical student in liberal New England who probably spends too much time paying attention to politics and never lacks topics for friendly discussions. Email Thomas Carroll: carroll@student.uchc.edu Tell a friend about this site! ------------ |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
