Media Bias -- Fact or Fiction

by Keith Cooper

From Broader View Weekly, September 26, 2008

In the late 1990s, Newt Gingrich and other powerful neo-conservatives set out to create a suspicion of the media and a supposed liberal bias. This push played well for conservatives, allowing them to control the narrative and to be critical of anything that presented their agenda in a negative light. It also planted a seed of doubt in the minds of the public that the media could be trusted to report the news accurately. Within this paradigm, facts that were inconvenient to the agenda could be discounted as examples of media’s vast left-wing conspiracy. This criticism has persisted for decades with varying amounts of success.

Today, the myth of liberal bias is experiencing a resurgence. And again, Gingrich is at the forefront bashing news personalities and painting the press with the same brush that has become the right’s favorite label for progressives and Democrats: elitist. The fact that few Americans could define elitism with any consistency, doesn’t dull the effect of the word and the way it inspires disdain of liberals. The fact that Republicans and conservatives tend to cater to the wealthy while alienating the average Joe is largely lost on the target audience. Most ignored Senator John McCain’s wealth and his wife’s extravagance while shaking their heads over Senator Barack Obama’s recent celebrity fundraisers.

Gingrich deftly wielded the elitism sword as he defended the Republican Party’s fair damsel, vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin in recent media clashes. When answering allegations about Palin’s lack of experience, Gingrich attempted to discredit Obama’s résumé. Then he went further, calling the media “elitists” and citing an anti-religion bias. In the 2008 presidential election, the press promises to be under as much scrutiny as the candidates themselves.

Admittedly, the media isn’t blameless in their reporting of the news. Stories and emphasis in the mainstream, largely corporately operated media machine, are influenced by economic viability, perceived popular opinion, and ratings over accuracy and importance. While complicity is difficult to assert in the selection and presentation of the news, it is plain that the collective corporate media holds extreme power over the narrative. One can predict the flow of the news cycle and its focus on any given day by the story with the most commercial value. Unfortunately, as newsroom staffs shrink, that focus becomes narrower and narrower, and news of importance is marginalized or ignored entirely.

There are instances where collusion seems evident. During the march to war in late 2002 and early 2003 the media’s presentation of the facts seemed play into the Bush administration’s strategy by emphasizing WMD suspicions while giving short shrift to contradictory evidence. In fact, a news source often labeled a liberal rag, the New York Times, played an integral part in making the case for war with Iraq. Judith Miller’s reporting in the lead-up is often credited with building the administration’s case. Officials would leak stories to Miller and others, then appear on talk shows and in press conferences pointing to those same stories as evidentiary support for their cyclical argument.

As the invasion began, we embedded reporters who became the cheerleaders for the U.S. shock and awe campaign. Now, in an election year media organizations are again embedding reporters… on the candidates’ campaign circuit. These campaign groupies are shifting their role from providing information to marketing. The same connection with soldiers and officers that colored the stories coming from the battlefield is forming between reporters and campaign offices in the trenches of political warfare. While reporters traveling with Obama’s road show were responsible in part for his celebrity, those embedded in the McCain camp are presenting his platform with obligatory favoritism.

Some of the media’s administration affiliation that existed in the short term after 9/11 is dissolving as some news reporters and organizations are returning to the role of educating the public instead of facilitating political policy. Still, it is true that bias does exist in the media. Several news organizations do present the news with a sympathetic angle to progressive and liberal causes. On the other hand, there is no shortage of voices on the right, with talk radio spitting out conservative talking points in the guise of news and “news” networks like Fox touting the Republican line in every story and calling itself fair and balanced.

The only way to navigate the stormy seas of information and remain afloat despite the swirl and spin of bias is to seek alternative sources. Catch an episode of Real Time With Bill Mahr every once in a while to offset your steady diet of Bill O’Reilly. Tune in to the Family Life Radio’s noon hour news show a few times instead of Democracy Now. If you’re a critic of the administration watch the press briefings and listen to the way it presents its own case. If you’re a McCain supporter watch some of Obama’s speeches in their entirety. Endure the other side’s argument and bite your tongue. You’ll be better informed and become a better citizen of democracy.

Don’t expect the mainstream media to present the news in a balanced way. But don’t despair. The news isn’t all bad – pardon the pun. The media doesn’t always shirk their responsibilities. In fact, the example my fellow columnist presented of the Times’ apparent bias is inaccurate. A cursory search of the Times website reveals several stories highlighting John Edwards extramarital affair. But even if the Times had completely ignored the story, there are differences between Edwards’ infidelity and Palin’s daughter’s unfortunate pregnancy. The affair was exposed months after Edwards had dropped out of the presidential race and the Democratic Party was already throwing him under the bus as it raced toward its convention. Also, Bristol Palin’s teen pregnancy was a relevant issue in view of Palin’s stand against sex education and for abstinence-only birth control. I applaud any news organization that didn’t bow to the outrageous claims that a candidate’s family members are off-limits despite their relevance to the debate.

Michael Douglas’ character Andrew Shepherd in The American President said, “America isn’t easy. America is advanced citizenship.” Part of the hard work of American citizenship is education oneself. It isn’t always easy, but there are reliable sources out there. I’m proud to say the Broader View Weekly is one.