I’m probably the last person on earth to read Bernie Goldberg’s “Bias.” What is striking to me is how little real information I’ve gleaned from it. The anecdotes are funny, the bias is both real and sad, but I’ve constantly found myself saying “Well…duh!” Perhaps the only eye-opener is the degree to which the majority of journalists can’t see that they are completely out of touch with mainstream America.
What amazes me more is how most of my liberal friends can’t see how biased journalism is. To them, the Wall Street Journal is a right-wing nut collection and Fox News is downright evil. But somehow, CNN is fair. National Public Radio is centrist. The New York Times is a voice of authority and reason. They'll start commentary with “I was reading in the Boston Globe this morning and it said…”, without it even crossing their minds that maybe, just maybe, there’s a serious agenda behind the story.
As for the conservatives and their new Bible, talk radio, all I can say is that while I disagree with the vitriol and some of the short-sighted “all big media is evil” speak, they at least should be applauded for coming out up front and admitting their political leanings and objectives. I find the Sean Hannitys and Bill O’Reillys of the world to be unlistenable, but you can’t say they’re misleading the listener by acting as if they’re objective, and I respect that a lot more than Maureen Dowd or Peter Jennings trying to convince me that they have any inkling of objectivity. However, that doesn't mean that Rush Limbaugh et al should be your information source, because it's just as short-sighted and ludicrous when someone starts with "Rush was talking about..."
If we are truly going to be an informed society, then it is incumbent upon us to start holding the media’s feet to the fire. Since I don’t expect any major news organization to suddenly start hiring capable reporters & commentators of the other side or even true centrists (since they all think they ARE centrist), then we must actually start pulling news from a variety of sources, even ones we might disagree with initially. If all you’re reading is the Hartford Courant or the Indianapolis Star, and all you’re watching is the local & network news, then it’s time to broaden your horizons a bit. A few suggestions, all of which are online in part or in full:
-The Wall Street Journal (www.wsj.com). They are pro-business, and they are definitely conservative when it comes to world politics. However, they are still New York City journalists, and there is a lot more liberalism in their slant than most people realize.
-U.S. News and World Report. (www.usnews.com ) Possibly the single best print publication in America when it comes to balanced reporting. Gloria Borger, Michael Barone, John Leo, Mortimer Zuckerman and Lou Dobbs are regular columnists. It doesn’t get much more diverse politically than that without retaining extremists.
-The Drudge Report (www.drudgereport.com). Yes, Matt does lean conservative. However, there are regular links to Maureen Dowd, Dick Morris, Helen Thomas and other liberals, as well as the BBC and the major news outlets (ABC, CBS, NY Times, Boston Globe, etc.).
-NPR (www.npr.org) – They’re liberal and yes, they have an agenda. But they do try hard to present both sides of the story and they keep alive what liberalism is supposed to be about, instead of the elitist version that is currently practiced by the Democratic Party, the Bay Area, and the entire northeast corridor.
The Chicago Tribune (www.chicagotribune.com) – Liberal by Midwest standards, conservative by coastal standards. Enough said.
Tuesday, January 25, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment