WaPo Editor Broder Says 'No Such Thing' As Media Bias

publiusforum.com ^ | 09/26/08 | Warner Todd Huston

[Mobile Vulgus]

In a recent visit to Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas, Washington Post political editor David Broder told students that he believes there is no such thing as media bias. He claims that too many confuse talk radio with journalism and imagines the bias is predicated on that basis.

Speaking also to WOAI radio, Broder said, "I have spent almost fifty years of my life covering campaigns with other people. I don't think there is a serious problem with ideological or political bias."

According to WOAI, Broder claimed not to see any bias in reporters of his generation nor in younger journalists. "I don't find a problem with bias among my younger colleagues at all," Broder said. "That's not a concern of mine."

So, what is the problem with the pervasive feeling from so many that there is media bias? Blame it on talk radio...

Read the rest at Publiusforum.com...

[Mobile Vulgus]

I think the guy's gone senile, er sumpthin!

[WayneS]

Well if BRODER says it, then it MUST be true...

;^)

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

"How could Bush have gotten elected? Nobody I know voted for him!"

[SolidWood]

He is so far out to the left that he thinks Michael Moore to be conservative and Krappy Couric to be professional. Of course he won’t find any bias, except eeevil “right wing talk radio”.

[HD1200]

To a fish in the sea everything in the world appears wet.

[Mr. K]

you would HAVE TO BE as stupid as david broder to think that way.

When the Republicans took over in 1994 they spent one entire news conference trying to explain why an increase of 6% is not a ‘cut’ in spending.

Broder insisted that since it wasn not an increase of 11% then “These are cuts”

I saw it live on TV.

speaking of this, why don’t we ever hear McCain talk about BASELINE BUDGETING

I think having Sarah Palin explain it on TV would cause a riot, if the american people listened and understood- and they are LISTENING WHEN SHE SPEAKS

[Cincinatus]

According to WOAI, Broder claimed not to see any bias in reporters of his generation nor in younger journalists.

Exactly. The MSM reflects his "inside-the-beltway" worldview, therefore, there is no bias, Q.E.D.

Next question?

[WayneS]

"I don't find a problem with bias among my younger colleagues at all," Broder said. "That's not a concern of mine."

Translation: "The vast majority of my younger are in total agreement with my leftist philosophy - so it's NOT a problem or concern for me".

[Paradox]

Off the top of my head, I recall 4 studies done at different Universities (Main stream universities, like UCLA, Stanford, Columbia, and I think UofChicago), and ALL of them pretty much concluded the same thing, that the MSM leans liberal, much more liberal than the citizenship of the country.

I recall one study that found that the MSM all leaned far liberal, while Fox news was the most centrist, with a slight liberal bent (yes, Faux news). They mentioned that editorially, Fox news was Conservative, but the news division was at the center.

Then you have Walter Cronkite admitting that the media is liberal. It is simply manifestly obvious.

[WayneS]

...the word colleagues should have been in my “Translation” somewhere.

[The G Man]

[theBuckwheat]

These fish all swim in the same water. There is no other water.

[1Old Pro]

Rarely will you find a “journalist” with liberal bias actually admitting it. In fact, mostly they all deny it, very humorous.

The lesson is that if they deny the obvious, how can we trust anything they report on?

[econjack]

Broder says the allegations of media bias frequently stem from the proliferation of politically charged radio talk shows and television analysis programs, which viewers and listeners ‘mistake’ for journalism.

Is this guy really that stupid? "Allegations"? I think one of the reasons that talk radio thrives is because it identifies and discusses the MSM bias. The good news is that Broder, et al, are so out of touch that the consuming public is leaving their medium in droves and the result is a dying market where he lives. If he, and his ilk, don't get the lesson that people prefer factual material and don't want social commentary passing off as "reporting", they will be gone within a generation.

[henkster]

The first rule of political correctness is that there is no political correctness.

The first rule of liberal bias is to deny it exist.

Liberalism, or better yet, marxism, has always based itself on lies. Ask anyone who suffered under Soviet Communism and escaped to the United States.

[OpusatFR]

Opus says everyone knows Washington Post is just Pravda on the Potomac.

[Scutter]

I don’t think he’s gone senile, I think he’s just always been an idiot.

[reagan_fanatic]

Good Lord - Broder is one on the most blatantly biased members of the news media.

How can he say that with a straight face? Is he practicing his comedy act?

[ClearCase_guy]

The studies I have seen tend to focus on how journalists vote. I'm making the number up, but if something like 85% of journalists vote for Democrats, or oppose tax cuts, or support abortion, then this shows a bias.

Studies like that are useful, but they leave open the possibility (ha!) that journalists lean one way in their private lives, but manage to avoid expressing their leaning in their work.

I don't think I've ever seen a statistical study of -- let's say -- how often "liberal senator Barack Obama" is printed vs "conservative senator John McCain" or how often "Democrat politician nabbed in sex sting" vs "State Rep arrested at truck stop".

I'm quite sure that the bias could be mathematically proven. Somebody in academia should get on that, but ... for some reason ... the academics don't seem eager to expose the bias. I can't imagine why not.

[riverdawg]

To find Joe Biden’s latest gaffe in the WaPo, claiming that President FDR reacted to the 1929 stock-market crash by going on TV to address the American public, you have to go to their blog section. If Sarah Palin had made that statement, the WaPo would have given it front-page, headline status and the editorial page would have been demanding her removal from the Republican ticket. (Not that its easy to tell the difference between the editorial and “news” pages in that rag.)