Resolved: The Press Leans Leftish
As a Centrist, I have always been more than a little bit skeptical about the vehement denials that the media establishment offers with regards to the political flavor of their coverage. Especially in Washington. It had been generally assumed before the new media advance that journalists were cool, objective creatures, never offering in their columns and regular chronicles of the slightest hint as to what they did in the quiet of the voting booth. No, they say, we do not lean left!
I call shenanigans. The thing is: many traditional media institutions -- the dying network news, for example -- do lean left. Did you watch "60 Minutes" in the run-up to the elections in 2004 and 2008? The New York Times Op Ed page? The Los Angeles Times? The Washington Post ? "There hasn't been this much excitement in The Washington Post newsroom since Brad Pitt dropped by," wrote Howie Kurtz of an Obama visit this week (see image above). Even The New York Post, which usually swings Republican, saw the writing on the wall as the McCain campaign fizzled and leaned Obama. There weren't too many pro-McCain editorial boards across the country, let me tell you (cue the lonesome cricket sounds).
Fox News, right wing radio and the right blogosphere are natural correctives to the traditional leftish lean. This country is built on the management of countervailing forces. And there is nothing wrong with leaning left -- just admit it for God's sake. Stop denying that the right wing media argument for low-taxation and high defense spending is simply a function of selfishness. What fuels the wrath of the right blogosphere, and on talk radio and on Fox, is the word "hypocrisy." Hacky demagogues like Ann Coulter and the choleric Bill O'Reilly would shrivel up and evaporate if the argument of "liberal hypocrisy" were no longer relevant. In this new media age admitting our biases at the outset -- like I just admitted my political Centrism in this post -- appears to be the way to go. So let's just admit what we already know: the traditional press leans leftish and get on with the business of our national bare knuckled intellectual brawl of politics.
[Image: Washington Post]
add to del.icio.us
add to digg
add to yahoo
related at technorati
share on facebook
Check our most impactful articles and see how popular these opinions are with you.
Will others follow in your footsteps? Share your thoughts and ideas for changing the world.
This is all true, Ron, but you don't address the fact that news organizations we know them are dying. The newspaper business, in particular, is in dire straits, and may evaporate completely within five or ten years.
What will be left in its wake? A spate of blogs and online news sources, some of which will be vetted and staffed by trained investigators, others not at all. But we're on the cusp of an age when the whole debate about Leftist, Rightist, or Centrist media will be a thing of the past.
I fear that in its place we'll find just a bunch of echo chambers full of idealogues, barking to each other and only each other in millions of little chat rooms around the world.
Ron, simply calling the media left-leaning does not make it so. What you have to acknowledge is that almost all the major media are owned by large corporate empires and have a lot of pressure to support the status quo. All of the major media supported the decision to go to war with Iraq, with the New York Times leading the charge from its front page. And the fact is the media did not really reverse its position until the facts were overwhelming that there were no WMDs and the public perception had already shifted against the war. The media did not adequately attempt to report the failings of the Bush administration in the months leading up to the 2004 election, which is a major reason he was able to eke out a victory (sort of). Of course, toward the end of the second term, as polls saw Bush's approval ratings plummet, the media stepped up its criticism of the administration, but I would hardly call that systemic bias. Did you see any outcry in the media regarding deregulation of banking and business over the past 8 years (or longer)? Do you see criticism of a U.S. Supreme Court that routinely votes for big business? Talk Radio is dominated by unabashed right-wing zealots and the traditional network news and major newspapers bend over backwards trying to be fair without even conceding their corporate bias. So, please provide the basis for your opinion that the mainstream media leans left, rather than simply assuming your conclusion.
David: Thanks again for the always well thought out comments. You are right. News organizations -- the traditional daily local paper, the network news -- are in dire straights. Google's cutting the Print Ads newspaper program, which although initially greeted with skepticism seemed to be a step in the right direction, follows the trend of disturbing news for the industry.
As someone who grew up on the New York Times and CBS News and the BBC -- all of which are more Center-letish leaning than hard left -- I wonder what this will do to the electorate. I am as deeply skeptical as you about the online sources that will flourish -- and are flourishing -- in the wake of the demise of hard news if, indeed, that is what we are witnessing. This post served a twofold purpose: one, to state a present trend provocatively to get some discussion going and 2) To maybe defang the Right's prime criticism of the drift of the major institutions of the media (not including radio, of course). I was amazed at how much traction the moribund McCain campaign got whenever they attacked the New York Times. The mere mention of the name of that institution solidified a base that he never even claimed during the Republican primary process.
Myklos: Great points also. The title and tone of the post was probably overly provocative, but I was trying, in the short period of time that it takes to read a blog post, to get some good discussion going. You are correct that the NYTimes supported the decision to go to war and that, sadly, may be the lasting memory of the paper of record should it continue to struggle (although, the new deal with Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim may present a new business model of media philanthropy).
Still, the Times leans center-left, and there was never any argument that the Editorial side was essentially going to go pro-Obama. Even David Brooks, who writes as a conservative on the Op Ed pages, admits that. I am not against a pro-Obama bias. You bring up strong points Mykolos regarding the major news and major newspapers and how they stand on deregulation. That gets to my use of "Leftish" as opposed to "Left," or "Liberal" as the Limbaughs of the world would have us believe.
You are right, the editorial board of the Los Angeles Times is not progressive nor is the President of NBC News trying to mirror their evening news broadcast with the stories in The Nation magazine. The leftishness is more cultural, especially, in many ways in how it deals with Christianity, a major force in this country. This morning I read -- in the more rightish WSJ about how much business Christian movies make in this country.
I think there is a systemic bias. I think that the larger media institutions are situated in big cities, project an editorial aura of big city sophistication (a simplification, but not a great one), and generally lean left center. That would not be a major problem except that it conflicts with the idea of objectivity that journalism tries to maintain. True objectivity is a superhuman virtue and while it is noble to aspire to it, it is unrealistic to claim to have already attained it. And that, unfortunately, fuels the sails of Coulter and O'Reilly and Limbaugh and the leagues of right-wing (wind) blogs. If we were to say, Yes, there is probably a bit of an institutional bias in big city major papers to the center-left, I think we could take food off the tables of those demagogues. That's what I was trying to say in this post. But thank you for making me work harder to articulate my strategy. It is an argument we should all be having in "the media".