Liberal bias in the media?

JWR ^ | FR Post 4-4-02 | Nat Hentoff

[vannrox]

| Bernard Goldberg, for 28 years a persistently fair, probing reporter for CBS News in the tradition set there by Edward R. Murrow, has written a current best-selling book, ""Bias A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News," .

His detailing of liberal bias in the media has been fiercely attacked by such mandarins of journalism as Tom Shales of the Washington Post, Michael Kinsley of Slate, and Tom Goldstein, dean of Columbia University's School of Journalism.

One of Goldstein's former colleagues at CBS News, Eric Enberg, has charged that Goldberg has committed "an act of treason." In my longtime experience as a reporter, I have found that the two groups most thin-skinned when criticized are the police and journalists.

Yet, Goldberg accurately points out -- among many examples -- that when he asked a senior producer for "CBS Evening News" how often she went to conservative women's organizations to comment on Congressional votes or Supreme Court decisions on women's issues, "She couldn't think of a single time."

Goldberg himself is pro-choice, pro-gay rights, and describes himself "as an old-fashioned liberal." He does not maintain that there is a conspiracy among liberal journalist to distort the news. Rather, many of them -- especially in the big dailies -- "share the same values on ... abortion, gun control, feminism, gay rights, the environment, (and) school prayer."

They believe that decent, mainstream Americans think as they do. After all, how many of their friends are pro-life or believe that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlawed all racial preferences in education and the workplace?

An even more substantial illumination of instinctive, rather than deliberate, bias in the media is William McGowan's "Coloring the News." McGowan, widely published in major newspapers, is also an insider. His extensive research notes testify to the facts -- not just assumptions -- of his findings.

For example: Ward Connerly, a California Board of Regents member, who has spearheaded attempts in that state and in the nation against racial preferences, is himself black. As I can attest, he is a man of principle and courage. Yet, McGowan reports, "an editorial cartoon in the Oakland Tribune features him with a KKK hood and rope hanging nearby."

McGowan also quotes the confession of a San Francisco Chronicle reporter that "newsroom culture definitely sent a message that it was okay to go after Connerly ... without considering what he was really saying."

If I were editor of a newspaper, I would ask all reporters and editors to read "Coloring the News," and to assess its relevance to their experiences of newsroom cultures.

A personal story: some years ago, I received the National Press Foundation's award for "lifetime distinguished contributions to journalism." When I came to Washington, where the late Meg Greenfield of the Washington Post presented the award, I ran into a member of the jury that selected me. "You almost didn't make it," she said. "There was quite a fight. It wasn't about the quality of your work," she reassured me.

Although I am against capital punishment, am pro-labor, and vote as an independent, none of that would have counted with some members of the jury who were pro-choice.

Though I am non-religious, I'm pro-life, and that almost did me in.

A book that merits more attention than the mainstream press has given it also speaks to the instinctive stereotyping by many Americans -- not only journalists -- whose cherished belief in diversity does not include diversity of ideas with which they don't agree. The book, by the emphatically independent Tammy Bruce, is "The New Thought Police: Inside the Left's Assault on Free Speech and Free Minds."

Bruce, former president of the Los Angeles chapter of the National Organization for Women, is pro-abortion rights and an activist lesbian. Yet, she campaigned against the successful gay and lesbian drive to get Dr. Laura Schlessinger off television.

A true believer in free speech, she describes how rampant political correctness is limiting the diversity of views on college campuses, Hollywood, and television.

Everyone's right to freedom of conscience is not self-executing. We have to be careful to give everyone a hearing.

[alloysteel]

Whatever happened to that famous dictum from history, "I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it?"

Oh, yeah, that was a quotation from right before the French Revolution got up to full speed. As I recall, the person to whom that quote was attributed was beheaded by the Paris Mob, who evidently disagreed with what he said.

[alcuin]

Good post.

[Mike Fieschko]

"I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it?"

Voltaire said (or wrote) that. He died in 1778. The French Revolution started eleven years later.

[NovemberCharlie]

Oh, yeah, that was a quotation from right before the French Revolution got up to full speed. As I recall, the person to whom that quote was attributed was beheaded by the Paris Mob, who evidently disagreed with what he said.

Not quite. The author of the quote was Voltaire, and he died about a decade before the revolution kicked off. Though if he had lived to it, I doubt he would have lived through it.

[100%FEDUP]

I've worked in several newsrooms and Goldberg has hit it on the head. Media people do not have secret meetings to twist the truth, they do it unconsciously.

The next time you watch the news pay close attention to how the word controversial is used. You will find that the word is most often used in reference to conservative ideas, opinions etc. David Horowitz, Pat Buchanan, Alan Keyes, Rush Limbaugh are always referred to (by the media) as the controversial author, controversial radio host etc.

Controversial is used in a negative light, usually because the writer is opposed to the idea or does not agree with the person he is referring to.

This grows out of the media's belief that they fully understand what mainstream america wants, understands and believes. If the media believes that a certain person's idea is controversial than mainstream america must agree as well. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I was reading a thread about reparations on a media board. An article in today's Boston Globe was the basis of the discussion, here is an excerpt of the article:

"The reparations campaign was long criticized as too broad in scope, as legally and politically inconceiveable, but in the past few years it has evolved into a mainstream movement that has attracted high-powered lawyers, prominent public figures, and respected civil rights organizations, including the NAACP....."

According to the author the idea of reparations is now a MAINSTREAM MOVEMENT. When exactly did this happen? Mainstream America does not appear to be rallying in the streets or at the capitol buildings over reparations now are they? So how is this a MAINSTREAM MOVEMENT? But not one media person on the board questioned the validity that reparations have become a mainstream movement because they all believe that it is in fact an absolute truth. Just further proof of an unconscious liberal bias in the media!

[ableChair]

"Liberal bias in the media?"

Does that really need a question mark?

[ItisaReligionofPeace]

Too bad I've never met a liberal man or woman who has a spine, let alone a gun.

[an amused spectator]

There is also a mainstream movement to cease paying taxes if the other "mainstream movement" shakes down our government for reparations.

It started here and now. ;-)

[Mike Fieschko]

Too bad I've never met a liberal man or woman who has a spine, let alone a gun.

I was about to post that the last ones of any significance were JFK and LBJ, but then thought of Scoop Jackson. That's 20 years or so ago.

[martin_fierro]

I saw one of the many interviews of Bernie recently where he said something like, "I've been interviewed now by dozens of TV stations and hundreds of newspapers and radio stations. All except for evening news shows: ABC, CBS and NBC."

If that doesn't say it all, I don't know what does.

[RWCon]

Who the hell is he kidding. Murrow was the biggest liberal (commie) of the bunch.

[thegreatbeast]

You got that right! The lousy journalists & the lousy pols work in concert to taint ideas that they don't agree with. Limbaugh is good at pointing these things out. This past weekend quote disengaged unguote was the catchword that the journalists & pols tried to hang Bush with. It paints him as lazy & disinterested while goading him to get mired in a messy business that is none of our business.

[thegreatbeast]

Crap! I meant to talk about MAINSTREAMING Reparations. Over my lifeless body. Patently ridiculous. But the BIG LIE gains credibility by simply being talked about. The intellectual equivalence of Hillary saying that something is old news, she's said all she's going to say and that its time to move on. Meanwhile you know that she never said anything of substance and fought discovery from the word go.

[100%FEDUP]

"But the BIG LIE gains credibility by simply being talked about."

And the media's refusal to report that lies are told are also part of the bias.

Remember during the 2000 election how many times Gore talked about the Social Security Trust Fund? Well it doesn't exist but the media never questioned the validity of what Gore, or any other Democrat, was saying!

The RATS in California have already started a "Simon will waste your Social Security" campaign. Unfortunately a Governor has no influence on any Social Security money but West coast media outlets aren't tripping each other to inform the viewers of that!

[Bullish]

You should study up a little on LBJ, a twisted guilt-ridden liberal if there ever was one. He did more to wreck America than even FDR. His "war on poverty" should really have been called the "re-shackling of the American negro".

I don't call that backbone. It's more like mental illness.

[He Rides A White Horse]

Rather, many of them -- especially in the big dailies -- "share the same values on ... abortion, gun control, feminism, gay rights, the environment, (and) school prayer."

They believe that decent, mainstream Americans think as they do. After all, how many of their friends are pro-life or believe that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlawed all racial preferences in education and the workplace?

I always found it amusing how the left will always pontificate on how the 'right wing', as they refer to it, are victims of group think, social polarization, so on and so forth.

Except that when you talk to them, you realize that they don't have an original thought in their heads. Seriously........all they do is ape that which has been programmed into their narrow little minds......all the slogans they repeat vacantly without any thought in regards to what they are actually saying. All they know is that some talking head on TV has uttered some useless platitude on the idiot box a thousand times, so, by golly, it must be true. ......

........and they'll repeat the same tired slogans as if they had just thought it up on their own. What a laugh.

[He Rides A White Horse]

One of Goldstein's former colleagues at CBS News, Eric Enberg, has charged that Goldberg has committed "an act of treason."

Yes, and I'll bet this 'liberal' totalitarian would like to have a trial for this 'crime'.

Leftists (liberals, call them what you will) are by their very nature inclined towards totalitarianism. What else can you say about a group of people who extol the virtues of collectivism at every turn?.......It's what they do; the individual is second behind the 'common good', which of course eventually translates as 'the will of the State'............show me a contempory liberal, and I'll show you a fascist oinker in sheep's clothing every time.

[Mike Fieschko]

You should study up a little on LBJ, a twisted guilt-ridden liberal if there ever was one. He did more to wreck America than even FDR. His "war on poverty" should really have been called the "re-shackling of the American negro".

I was thinking of the Vietnam War, when LBJ did have the 'spine' to resist the Communists.

And yes, I know he resigned. I watched him say that in the TV speech.

[crazyj]

this is an incredibly sweet post. I agree with the term for controversial and understand how it can be done so unintentionally. However Media does certain things purposefully like backing sponsors or not sharing both sides of a story or more for that matter, by doing so a news organization in a sense clings to its ignorance but can no lnger use that as an excuse. These organizations would gain mnore respect if theys aid yes i am biased, yet they fight that stance and act is if they were biased. There is only one that I know of that at least tries and therefore can actually claim that it is fair and balanced. I think this is why fox is at the top while many others are not.