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.
In America we value the freedom of the press. The press is the one place where most Americans go to get educated on issues facing their community, state, and most of all, nation. Everyone knows that the media plays a large role in Americans’ lives, but their role of gatekeeper is not completely understood. The press decides which issues to report and how to report it. In order to improve the nation and world, the media should present their findings with as little bias as possible to allow citizens to make up their own minds. Realistically however, this is not the case. The media show their bias most when covering politics. Their widespread exposure enables them to communicate their ideas to the public, regardless of the public’s responsiveness. The elections of all areas of the federal government during the late 20th century serve as prime examples of the bias the media contains. By analyzing surveys, media delivery, and reporter testimonies, I have found that the media is actually more out of touch with mainstream America than the politicians they cover.
In 1984, the nation’s economy was booming, most people were happy with their leader, and Ronald Reagan was up for reelection. Reagan had previously helped the nation cope with a recession and had been in office when American hostages were released. With things going so well, one wonders why anyone would oppose this popular conservative leader. However, former Vice President Walter Mondale, disenchanted with the way things were going, ran for and received the Democratic nomination. Immediately, the press had found their new man. He was going to be the one to stop the increases in defense spending, to increase the reach of the government, and to make sure the government was there to consistently support the poor. In order to do this, at the 1984 Democratic Convention, Walter Mondale announced that he would raise taxes on the American people. The people were outraged, conservatives went wild, and the press sat quiet, leaving their criticism to a minimum. They were not as bothered by this news as one would think.
Perhaps they were supportive of Mondale because they thought taxes needed to be raised to help with the debt caused by new government programs and rising costs of current ones. If this were the case, then one would expect them to praise a conservative such as George Bush when he raised taxes in response to pressure from a Democratic Congress. Instead, they only pointed out that he had gone back on a promise, and refused to admit that what he did was put the economy on the road to becoming the strong system it is today. As for Reagan, when Election Day finally came around, the president had been reelected with 59% of the popular vote, and carried 49 states. He only lost Mondale’s home state, and even that was by a small margin. Despite the large majority that Reagan won with, he received no help from the White House Correspondents. Out of ten of these correspondents surveyed, all ten voted for Mondale while zero voted for Reagan (US News & World Report). At a time when the American people were clearly united, the media went against the mainstream and voted for the liberal. The American public was backing Reagan’s policies, but the media was not.
Every morning and night, people turn on their televisions to be informed of what is going on in their country. Instead of getting the simple facts in reporting, they receive the media’s personal spin. Many Washington reporters do not simply come out and say they are in favor of a certain policy, but they do deliver the information in a way that makes the alternative appear absurd. “The new Republican majority in Congress took a big step today on its legislative agenda to demolish or damage government aid programs, many of them designed to help children and the poor,” reports Dan Rather (Liberal Bias). After hearing such words as “demolish,” the average American automatically believes that what the Republicans are doing is bad. Instead of reporting that Congress is repealing some government programs, or trimming spending, they insist on sensationalizing the news and making it seem that the Congress is evil.
And when the public turns out to support a conservative view, the media then works to lessen its importance and appeal. One example is the Republican victories in Congress in 1994. When reelection time came up, and Bob Dole was running for president, the media played down the sweeping reforms that took place at the hands of Congress: the welfare reform, the lobbyist reforms, or the line item veto. Instead, Katie Couric said, "Speaker Gingrich and company's Contract with America was ultimately rejected by the majority of Americans and few people believe it was really behind the GOP sweep of the congressional elections in 1994" (Liberal Bias). She wanted the public to believe that the 1994 elections were a result of voting against Clinton, and not for Republican principles. This is an obvious case of playing down the view of the public and inserting the media’s own thoughts into the mouths of the average citizen.
Perhaps the most convincing piece of evidence of media bias comes not from statistics or polls, but from the personal admissions of prominent journalists. Such journalists are the best sources for analyzing their peers and industry. One individual, CBS correspondent Bernard Goldberg stated, "There are lots of reasons fewer people are watching network news, and one of them, I'm more convinced than ever, is that our viewers simply don't trust us. And for good reason. The old argument that the networks and other `media elites' have a liberal bias is so blatantly true that it's hardly worth discussing anymore. No, we don't sit around in dark corners and plan strategies on how we're going to slant the news. We don't have to. It comes naturally to most reporters," (Media Resource Center).
If one of their own believes they cannot be trusted, then the American people cannot be expected to believe the press either. They claim that they don’t plan their liberal strategies, but what should be planned is to act on their responsibility to present the news in an unbiased way. Newsweek Bureau Chief Evan Thomas stated, "There is a liberal bias. It's demonstrable. You look at some statistics. About 85 percent of the reporters who cover the White House vote Democratic,” (Evan Thomas). The people who hire these correspondents therefore are in a sense planting a liberal media in the White House. To do an informative job, they should attempt to hire an approximately equal number of reporters from each side. To do otherwise, the press admits, has a dramatic impact on a candidate’s chances. No matter what good things a person has done, if the media decides to publish the bad, their chances are blown. Fifty-five percent of journalists at national media outlets felt that Bush’s chances in 1992 were hurt by the way the press covered him while only 11% felt Clinton was hurt by his portrayal by the media (Times Mirror Center). The acknowledgement of this slant in news coverage by journalists is the most troubling of all evidence that exists to suggest that bias is present.
Americans recognize the large role the media plays in their lives. Forty-three percent say that the press plays the most influential role in determining which issues and events are considered important (Times Mirror Center). The media’s role in politics is even more significant. They help shape the political culture, and have the power to make a candidate appealing or repulsive. In 1984 they tried to unseat Ronald Reagan by going against public opinion and not attacking Mondale as they would have done to any other conservative candidate. In 1992, they attacked George Bush for doing what Mondale had proposed, and as a result, Bush lost reelection.
The media has taken many opportunities to try to help the public “misinterpret” the actions of conservatives, and as a result, all conservative candidates have had to fight an uphill battle.
The media needs to stick to reporting on politics, and not
shaping it. The media should not have the bias of the nation, but should offer information to allow ideas to form
freely. They need to look in the mirror and then see who the real “out of touch extremists” are. With only 16% of
reporters calling themselves Republicans while 44% call themselves Democrats, one has the right to suspect that
reporting is skewed (Freedom Forum). This suspicion is proven with numerous comments and viewpoints
expressed by those in the media.
"Media Bias in Politics" -- This title is total false. The media, TV networks and major eastern newspapers are not bias about politics. All one has to do is watch CNN to view their complete balanced reporting on Florida court actions. All of the CNN (aka Clyner News Network) reporters are very pleased to see the rule of law that is being applied in the ballot recount requests (law suits) made by the DEMS. The media is total dishonest in their coverage of politics. The title of this article should have been, MEDIA DISHONESTY IN THEIR COVERAGE OF POLITICS. Just looked up the definition of "Dishonesty" -- not to be trusted. Just think if the same standard of balanced honest news coverage that GE/NBC/MSNBC/CNBC as well as CNN (aka Clyner News Network) use in their political reports was also applied to CNBC daily business & finanical reporting. Their creditability would disappear in a New York second.
Media bias is my main hobby horse. I hold the media responsible for the seriousness of our political problems and for foisting upon our country corrupt leaders such as Bill Clinton, Jesse Jackson, Janet Reno, Al Gore, and many otehrs.
It is correct that the most dangerous aspect of media bias is suppression of relevant stories, not just the biased way their stories are presented. Two good resources to monitor the media are:
Accuracy in Media often reports on comparisons between two relevant stories, one that favors a liberal agenda and one that favors a conservative agenda. Invariably they find stories that favor a liberal agenda are reported much more widely, including newspapers across the country, than stories that favor a conservative agenda.
Thanks for the links-- I just put them up on another post of yours--
Reed Irvine of AIM said a while back, "If the mainstream press doesn't like a story, they just won't talk about it..."
Think Monica...
Think impeachment...
Think Red China...
Think Panama Canal...
Think Blood Trail...
Media bias is my main hobby horse. I hold the media responsible for the seriousness of our political problems and for foisting upon our country corrupt leaders such as Bill Clinton, Jesse Jackson, Janet Reno, Al Gore, and many others.
We must hammer this home...There is much work to do and Free Republic has been, and will continue to be a major thorn in their side. We have much work to do.
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.
[
Top
|
Latest Posts
|
Latest Articles
|
Self Search
|
Add Bookmark
|
Post
|
Abuse
|
Help!
]
FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC |