Asks the WaPot ombudsman Patrick B. Pexton. He talks about the bias people see in the new articles and then moves on to the columnists:
One aspect of The Post that particularly irks conservatives is the columnists who appear in print and online in news positions (as opposed to those on the editorial and op-ed pages and the online Opinions section). With the exception of Dan Balz and Chris Cillizza, who cover politics in a nonpartisan way, the news columnists almost to a person write from left of center.
Balz and Cillizza are nonpartisan? That assertion screams liberal bias.
Is it any wonder that if you’re a conservative looking for unbiased news — and they do; they don’t want only Sean Hannity’s interpretation of the news...
They. That's telling.
... that you might feel unwelcome, or dissed or slighted, by the printed Post or the online version? And might you distrust the news when it’s wrapped in so much liberal commentary?
Yeah, they need to get a lot of conservative columnists if they want to get away with doing the news liberal-style. Isn't that
the Wall Street Journal method?
Posts
28 comments:
Maybe if they just had some journalists that knew how to write on a college level.
Other than that it's the best high school newspaper in the country.
Opinion masquerading as news. Nothing new under the corrupt ultra-left sun.
This time, they have kicked their extreme bias in then "News" sections into the stratosphere for dear leader.
Btw – Tax payers spent 1.4 billion on Obama last year.
The way the media uses "non-partisan," it means "left wing" rather than "Democrat."
The only thing Conservative about the Journal is its editorial page, is the way it's usually put.
It's only natural that the leading newspaper in company town devotes itself to glorifying and advancing the Industry.
Speaking of bias…
Jason Alexander—Seinfeld’s “George Costanza”—was in Iowa last week (along with FLOTUS) to encourage early voting, which started Thursday.
Cloying coverage in the Des Moines Register and on WHO-TV, our NBC affiliate. Only WHO bothered to mention, and then only in passing following the breathless George Costanza coverage, that our local Congressional Medal of Honor winner, Sal Giunta, was supporting…Romney.
Staff Sgt. Giunta needs a better publicist, I guess.
This much. That is a video from Pat Caddell on how fucked up our media is. At least one guy on the Dem side has some intellectual honesty.
On another note, Post had a headline picture of Aung San Suu Kyi receiving the congressional medal from Boehner (couple of weeks ago). She was surrounded by Pelosi, Hillary and Laura Bush who was standing next to Boehner. Post's picture completely obscured Laura Bush. If you saw that picture you would not even know she was standing there. There were other pictures from other news papers which showed all three women.
We at the WH love, love dan Balz and Chris C. Their presence in the Oval Room events is most wonderful. We are so proud of their interests in our CORE for POTUS.
-Member, COmmittee to Re-Elect the POTUS
It would be nice if the WaPo acknowledged black racism. But as we all know only whites experience fear and hate for no reason whatsoever. The reverse? VERBOTEN!
To ask the question is to answer it.
Bias, it's not a question of reporting bias any more. The media are active participants in the effort to get Obama re-elected. The media are a much better set of advocates and more effective resource for Obama than his re-election team in that they give Obama a huge propaganda machine.
I can't stress this enough. If you have time, watch this video of Pat Caddell.
Why does Valerie Jarrett get 24/7, even on vacation security protection on our dime but the Ambassador was out there in Benghazi without adequate protection? And more.
The periodic confessions of people from the WaPo or the NY Times that there may be something to these charges of liberal bias are always amusing.
As blatantly biased as most MSM outlets are, conservatives can at least take solace in the fact that, as businesses, most of them are dying.
With one exception.
Bloomberg LP has the best business model on Wall Street, and in addition to supporting the gathering and dissemination of financial news and data, it increasingly supports a very liberal - but economically sustainable - mainstream news operation.
Liberal broadsheets, and news weeklies, and evening newscasts, are all living on borrowed time.
The future of liberal news bias is Bloomberg News:
http://senatorjohnblutarsky.blogspot.com/2012/09/i-have-seen-future-of-liberal-media-and.html
I know ombudsman are supposed to be impartial and all that, but when you are opining about the organization that signs your paychecks, doesn't that make your judgement suspect?
Media entities don't get to rate themselves as to how biased they are. That is for someone else to determine. They'd never tolerate that from a news story subject. Do you think they'd just reprint Mitt Romney saying what an honest and caring guy he is, just because he said so? Hells no.
Since the Internet has made media criticism a cottage industry, the MSM's reaction is to have doubled down on stupid. Instead of accepting legitimate criticism and trying to improve their product, they have become more belligerent in their bias like -- to paraphrase a fine example of the problem, Peter Jennings -- a scolded child throwing a temper tantrum.
Before I grew up, I lived in DC and read the Post avidly. Then I married, had a kid, am now living in FL and find that Balz & Cillizza are only slightly left-wing, while Eugene Robinson and E.J. Dionne are flaming bomb throwers out to destroy capitalism and turn our country over to those competent bureaucrats at the UN.
Now it is The Nation printed on a daily basis. Even the front page is Democrat agitprop.
Reporting with a bias is still reporting. When you deliberately shade the truth to promote your side, that is agitprop, not reporting.
The MSM does not support the Democratic Party; they demand that the Deemocratic Party support them.
I would prefer my reporting to be without bias to any interest. Any bias, whether of commission or omission, serves to reduce the value of information and therefore undermines my ability to manage risk and properly plan for its mitigation.
The journalists should be pursuing an objective standard. Unfortunately, that would severely constrain their products' appeal and profitability.
When the water in the fish tank has gotten so foul that even the fish start to notice, you know it's time to dump the whole tank and start over.
If you're whining you're losing. And the whining is epic and perhaps unprecedented.
The guy who whined continually about Scott Walker now thinks people shouldn't talk about the fact that the major media outlets are suppressing news that would hurt Obama's re-election prospects.
Thanks for the laugh.
Just how much liberal bias is there in the Washington Post news and opinion?
Just how much time you got? On the plus side, less than the New York Times.
The WaPo is essentially a federal employees' newsletter. It would be cutting its own throat to oppose higher government spending. And as for tax and regulatory policy, well businesses don't buy very many WaPo subscriptions.
The NYT is a different story. My guess is that it has too many former Harvard Crimson editors on staff.
... that you might feel unwelcome, or dissed or slighted, by the printed Post or the online version?
I don't think this quite captures it. I think anyone looking for unbiased news feels that their intelligence is insulted by the drivel in the Post and dismay at the degradation of news journalism.
pm317 wrote:
I can't stress this enough. If you have time, watch this video of Pat Caddell.
Why does Valerie Jarrett get 24/7, even on vacation security protection on our dime but the Ambassador was out there in Benghazi without adequate protection? And more.
Caddell is a crank. But in the best sense of the word. And spot on.
I'm trying to think how to answer this to the person who is "in the middle." How, democratic!, the Clintonesque triangulation is.
Ann has defined herself as a middle of the roader because there are things she dislikes about the left and the right. Nihilism. Now she finds this red meat topic has only 26 (now 27) comments.
Yes, the professor has gotten away with this because she is an observer. But her recent narcissistic foray into opinion, "I am MIGHTY! I am in the MIDDLE! NO one is going to take MY vote for granted" has caused some small reaction.
See, Ann, your opinion doesn't matter if you want to be an observer. That's a great place to be, and I laud it. But when you want to inject your opinion into it, you have to take a side. But if that's what you are going to do, you have to decide.
No more Mrs. Nice Althouse on Blogging Heads, in which you allow yourself to be talked over. Now you have to assert yourself.
No more complaining about the status-quo. You have to offer a solution.
Or, be an observer. You do it incredibly well. Point out the hypocrisies on both sides. But please, don't give us this "That's a racist video" crap, because it's a black person's image, when audio is being played.
Address the issue of entitlement. That is the real issue. Acknowledge it. And please, leave your childhood "gotta be the best" insecurity behind. You are the best.
" Then I married, had a kid, am now living in FL and find that Balz & Cillizza are only slightly left-wing, while Eugene Robinson and E.J. Dionne are flaming bomb throwers out to destroy capitalism and turn our country over to those competent bureaucrats at the UN. "
I have hopes that my left wing middle daughter who wants to have a baby will swing right after as her sister-in-law believes. Her husband is just as left wing, as is my older son's wife, but hope springs eternal. They are all smart enough to see through Obama's agenda But seem stuck on economic illiteracy.
Post a Comment