Liberal Media Bias: A Tale of Two Johns at ABC News

John Edwards Indicted By Federal Grand Jury for Conspiracy and False Statements ...

Pretty serious. But I noticed something interesting about the article having read it in its entirety:

Number of paragraphs: 24. Number of words: 947. Number of instances Edwards’ party affiliation is mentioned: ZERO.

Think that if the indicted was a Republican, Woodruff and friends wouldn’t have told us?

Lest one think this it’s wrong to make a generalization from a single article, ABC News’ story about Edwards from yesterday (also by Woodruff, et al.) also fails to mention his party affiliation.

Remember disgraced Senator John Ensign (R-NV)? When he resigned last month due to a sex scandal, ... it takes anchorette Robin Roberts only 6 seconds before saying “Republican” for the first time. Jake Tapper picks up the report at 0:21 seconds. Merely 2 seconds and 9 words in, Tapper utters “Republican.” Here, exactly is how Tapper began this objective news story:

Just a few days ago, Senator John Ensign, Nevada Republican, brought his Senate career to its sad and pathetic end.

Now, in this [Edwards] video, ... Robin Roberts and George Stephanopolous talk for 41 seconds about the Edwards indictment, without one single utterance of “Democrat.” Then, they go to Woodruff reporting from D.C. In the 2.5+ minutes of Woodruff’s report, not once is “Democrat” said. At the 3:00-mark, the report goes back to Stephanopolous, who brings on legal analyst Dan Abrams. Again, for a minute and 45 seconds, Edwards party affiliation is not mentioned.

And in this Special Report from earlier today, again with Stephanopolous and Abrams, zero mention of the word Democrat in all of its 2+ minutes.

Now, just to triple check, I watched ABC News’s report on John Ensign from May 12. While his party affiliation is indeed missing from the web page, anchor Bob Weir starts his news story,

In neither an almost 1,000-word printed report, nor on the relevant web page, nor in a 4:45-minute televised story on John Edwards, is “Democrat” mentioned even once.

But three weeks ago, John Ensign’s “Republican” affiliation was mentioned sometimes in print and always on TV.

A while back Newsweak called Grand Rapids Michigan a dying city. Grand Rapids fought back in spectacular fashion and set a world record in the process. Local businessmen spent $40 thousand and the people got together and made this really great lipsync video of Don McLean’s “Miss American Pie”.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPjjZCO67WI&feature=player_embedded

Its gonna hit 2 million views by tonight. Better yet I think its going to generate enough buzz to help their local economy.

ever-present meme in the MSM that goes like this; If you belong to a party that likes to party with prominent members like Teddy Kennedy, Bill Clinton and others, it is no scandal that they have fun because their party has no position on moral behavior.

I dislike references to "the media," for the simple reason that one medium of communication or another is not the issue. Unless you think that fiction - which is a pure expression of opinion, whether or not it has any political implications - can somehow be forced into some "fair and balanced" strait jacket, it is only journalism - in whatever medium it is transmitted - which can even notionally be held to account. And even then, the First Amendment does not contemplate having journalists held account for "bias."

On the other hand those puritanical demagogues of fundamental fascism have no right to purvey morals when even one of their members shows feet of clay.

Journalism is a format of topical information/opinion. Wire service journalism, with the Associated Press in the lead in America, transformed journalism from an openly opinionated form, with competing points of view expressed without apology to the putatively objective newspaper with the Editorial page as a vestige of the newspaper's former opinionated self. The main function of the Editorial Page is to help "position" the rest of the newspaper as being "objective."
The current article discusses a particular example of wire service journalism's mentioning Republicans in an unfavorable light, and of avoiding mentioning Democrats in an unfavorable light in a similar or more egregious circumstance. This is part of the pattern we observe of wire service journalism labeling those who are simpatico with journalism favorably, and labeling those who are not unfavorably.
The words "liberal," "progressive," "moderate," and "centrist" are all intended as favorable labels. Indeed, "liberal" refers to "liberty," the preservation of which
secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity,
is the primary mission of the Constitution. And progress
Article 1 Section 8. The Congress shall have power . . . To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries . . .
is also a mission of the Constitution. And "centrist" is just another word for "moderate" which is a classical virtue.
The negative intent of labeling someone "extreme right wing" is hard to miss, but even "conservative" is unmistakably intended as a negative label in a milieu in which advertisers lust to label their products NEW!
Indeed, "liberal" was the appropriate label for American so-called "conservatives" until the meaning of the word was inverted in the 1920s.

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.