From: cedman@714-725-3165.nts.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Subject: Re: Media Bias at Republican Convention
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.news-media
Reply-To: cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Date: 21 Aug 92 03:36:20 GMT

Mark Preece writes
> One reason people think that the media is to the left of
> them is that the media is (are?) full of conservative
> voices telling them that the  media is to the left of them.
> Buchanan, Fred Barnes, Novak, Will,  Buckley, Sununu...
> These are all people who, if they were in public office, 
> would be seen as the "right wing" of the current
> Republican administration.  Now try to think of regular
> commentators to the left of Clinton.  Kingsley? Germond?
> Sam Donaldson? None of these people is far enough left to
> write for The Nation, let alone something  really
> "leftist". It looks to me like, if we define the current
> candidates as the "mainstream",  the "right wing" has
> more media representation than the "left wing".

This is not really what the common charge of media bias is all about.

Indeed there are many commentators both clearly left and right. And while some  
of the more popular talk shows on PBS or CNN probably have a right-wing slant  
in the choice of their commentators, many others have strong left-wing slants  
like eg. "Both sides with Jesse Jackson" (I _really_ do wonder who thought of  
that name) or the "MacNeil Lehrer Newshour". And while I think that probably on  
balance there is more from the left than from the right, I'll concede that  
there is a rough equilibrium. And in commentary that is really all you need.  
After all all these commentators are clearly marked as such and will either  
strongly imply their political allegiance or just outright trumpet it like eg.  
on "Crossfire". All they say is obviously just the opinion of the speaker. As  
long as the viewers are aware of that and can weigh those opinions accordingly  
and no side gets completely shut out there really is not very much harm done.

But as I said media bias does not refer to syndicated columnists. Media bias is  
something considerably insidious. Media bias refers to strong left leanings of  
news people who pretend to just be objectively reporting facts and how those  
leanings greatly alter about what they report and they report it. These  
reporters and editors vote Democratic in every presidential election at rates  
between 70% and 90%. Not that these reporters habitually and intentionally lie.  
But they will go out and try to find true stories which further their point of  
view.  Then they will go to members of the left and get their interpretation of  
the fact. And when they write the stories they will use the language of the  
side which the left supports. _This_ most people are not aware of and that fact  
allows these reporters to subtly color everything most americans take for  
facts.

To be concrete, it is true that not a single of the commentators on the talk  
show circle writes for the Nation. (On the other hand only one writes for the  
National Review while three or four write for the left-leaning New Republic).  
But did you know that two of the nations half dozen most influential TV news  
casters/editors appear in the masthead of the Nation ? 

	Carl Edman
Xref: sparky alt.activism:14942 talk.politics.misc:40216