A
couple of weeks ago, an election was held to fill a vacancy in
Georgia’s 6th Congressional District. The seat had been
held by the Republicans since 1979, and pundits saw this election as
a key test of President Trump’s popularity and its effect on GOP
candidates.
The
election could be settled if a single candidate out of the 18 running
received more than 50 percent of the vote. Otherwise, there would be
a runoff on June 20 between the top two vote getters.
The
Democratic candidate received a bit more than 48 percent, far more
than any other candidate, but not enough to avoid a runoff.
For
the Democrats, it was a victory, but bittersweet for failing to send
a strong message about Trump’s declining popularity. For the
Republicans, it was a near miss, but one which could well be reversed
in the runoff.
Here
are the headlines of news reports, not editorial comment, about this
election in several major national media outlets.
Washington
Post: “Republicans avoid big loss by forcing runoff in Georgia
House race.”
New
York Times: “Democrat just misses victory in Georgia House race.”
Wall
Street Journal: “Democrats falter in bid for outright win in
Georgia House race.”
Associated
Press: “Georgia House race to high-stakes runoff as Trump wades
in.”
The
Washington Post and the New York Times editorial pages strongly
oppose Trump and generally support Democrats. In contrast, while the
Wall Street Journal seems lukewarm about Trump, it is faithful to GOP
conservatism. The Associated Press provides news reports to media of
all political stripes.
From
these headlines, it seems clear that a newspaper’s editorial stance
can influence the slant it puts on a news story.
Readers
can get the message. If you support the Republicans, you can easily
see the New York Times headline as coming from the opposition.
Because of that newspaper’s standing in the media main stream, it
becomes ripe for attack by conservatives who believe most such
newspapers are biased against them.
This
sense of alienation from what some conservatives call the “lame
stream” media has helped promote openly conservative and right wing
resources like Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. They are safe and
comfortable havens from what is seen as a biased main stream.
With
each side having its own preferred media outlets, while spurning the
others, the political gap deepens. Each side believes it has the
facts right, while the opposition distorts the truth.
This
is not so much a question of so-called “alternative” facts as it
is a matter of selective coverage. Of course, there’s a certain
amount of downright fabrication on the right and unbalanced
consideration of opposition views on the left. The result can lead
to the conclusion there’s much “fake news.”
The
harm of inherent bias is considerable, because a free and fair media
is essential to the American system. If the people rule, they must
be informed to make good judgments. They cannot depend on
government, which is often not responsible to the public. Instead,
they must depend on the media to inform them and convey their views.
Trump
dismisses interest in his tax returns and says only the media,
apparently a minor player in his view, seeks them. Not only do the
polls show he is wrong, but the media represents that public
interest. The media is not an end in itself, but is the public’s
path to participation in the political process outside of elections.
A
recent example, not involving government, demonstrates the power of a
free media. The New York Times revealed that Fox and Bill O’Reilly,
its star personality, had paid $13 million to settle complaints of
sexual harassment by O’Reilly.
Fox
had not fired him, despite these payouts. It fired him only when the
complaints were made public in the media. The media forced Fox to
honor what it called its “consistent commitment to fostering a work
environment built on the values of trust and respect.” Where was
that “commitment” before the Times’ revelations?
The
problems with news bias may explain the relative success of local
newspapers compared with some major papers. Local outlets focus
mainly on covering local news for people who may have no other
reliable source.
Of
course, local papers may reveal bias, but they are more likely to
recognize their survival depends on fair reporting for all readers,
regardless of ideology.
In
the end, readers and viewers have their own responsibility to keep
open and critical minds when reading or watching the news.
No comments:
Post a Comment