The Media Isn't Supposed to be Neutral

Email Print posted by Cenk 05/07/2006 01:31:04 AM EST

Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit
If you like this story, digg it!
The media isn't supposed to be neutral - it is supposed to be objective. There is an enormous difference between the two. And this is a difference that has been lost on the mainstream media for quite awhile now.

The media isn't supposed to be neutral - it is supposed to be objective. There is an enormous difference between the two. And this is a difference that has been lost on the mainstream media for quite awhile now.

Conservatives have shouted from the rooftops that the media isn't being fair to them when they report news that shows conservatives in a bad light. But it isn't the media's job to decide what is and is not fair to any political party. Their job is to report the news -- whatever it might be.

Republicans have pulled a very effective switcheroo on the press, substituting the concept of neutrality for objectivity. Whenever the press dares to report something that does not reflect well on the Republican Party, it gets accused of having a "bias." As Stephen Colbert would say, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."

If the media reports on a story objectively and it does damage to the Republicans, that is not a bias. That is a sad day for the Republican Party. The truth hurts. Of course, the same is true of the Democratic Party.

So, if people weren't rescued for five days in New Orleans, it is not biased to report the Bush administration didn't show up. They didn't. It would be folly to report that some say the administration did a terrific job in rescuing people in an effort to appear neutral. If Ted Kennedy drove off a bridge, it is not a conservative bias to report that either.

It is not biased to say that Iraq is undergoing tremendous civil strife. It is not biased to say the administration claimed the Iraqis would throw roses at our feet. It is not biased to say that the administration's claims did not match reality. Though reporting these facts might not be neutral to the administration, it certainly is objective.

Conservatives often complain that liberals want equality of results rather than equality of opportunity in social programs. They say equality of results is not possible and the best we can do  is equality of opportunity for everyone in society. I agree. However, they argue the exact opposite when it comes to the press. They don't want equality of opportunity, they want equality of results. They don't want fair coverage, they want coverage which shows two equal sides no matter what actually happened.

Since liberals didn't make the same complaint for a long time (they've gotten better at this recently), you have had an uneven playing field. Reports that were negative to Democrats would register no complaints. But reports that showed negative results for Republicans would be met with a chorus of bias accusations.

This whining to the refs has worked for years for the Republicans. It has resulted in a press that is gun shy to objectively report bad news about Republicans, but has no similar restraint for reporting negatively about Democrats.

It has also led to the absurd idea of "balanced" coverage for issues like the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. It is not biased to say that group ran a well orchestrated smear campaign against John Kerry. In fact, you give up your claim to objectivity if you cover that story by reporting their side of the story as equally valid to John Kerry's side. One side was lying, the other wasn't. It is irresponsible and inaccurate to report otherwise.  

I love the idea of importing this nonsense idea of media neutrality to sports journalism. Tonight the Phoenix Suns beat the Los Angeles Lakers 121-90. If the Lakers were the Republicans and the Suns were the Democrats, conservatives would cry foul when the press reported that they had gotten their ass kicked tonight. Is saying the Lakers lost evidence of a Suns bias? No, it's evidence that you watched the game.

Truth exists. It is supposed to be the job of the press to try to find it and report it to the best of their abilities. It is not their job to try to create an artificial neutral reality.

< Scientology's Super Power | Another cut and runner >
 Display:
The Media Isn't Supposed to be Neutral | 5 comments (5 topical, 0 hidden)
This is a great post about the state of our media. (none / 0)
They had a huge influence over the 2004 election and they did slant things to the right in their attempt to present both sides.  The Swifties were liars and they were given equal time. Giving liars, who all the evidence illustrates are liars, equal time is just plain wrong. The MSM is still at it too. Tom Delay is indicted and Tweetie (Chris Matthews) gives Delay every opportunity to present his case. That should be for the court, not the media. The man is facing prison for breaking the law. Report it, but for God's sake, don't make him a media star.

by DynamicDems on 05/07/2006 02:18:59 PM EST

Teach the controversy (none / 0)
The same tactics are used by those supporting the teaching of "intelligent design" in public schools. Under the guise of "teach the controversy" religious conservatives try to appeal to people's sense of neutrality and fairness. It's all part of the Republican War on empiricism which reduces all sides of an argument to opinion. It's detrimental to this country to ignore objective standards in formulating policy. Not all sides are equal, and we shouldn't pretend they are.

by swoon on 05/08/2006 09:24:31 AM EST

pH 7.0 (none / 0)

Cenk, you've come up with excellent metaphors illustrating an issue that has been bugging me for a long time. People act like the news has to have a pH of 7.0, nice and neutral so we don't get indigestion.

In many American institutions there is an emphasis on reducing the undesirable information over increasing the desirable. In legal matters the first job is to get all the opponent's evidence thrown out. Many negative attack ads cast doubt on the opponent's claims instead of answering them with information. Government officials resist using aids like presentations to make meetings more informative (unless it's Roscoe Bartlett telling an empty Congressional meeting room about our energy problems). And then there's the classic "not while there is an ongoing investigation". I am so fed up with the emphasis on giving less information, not more.

When it finally becomes impossible to completely suppress the bad news, the next tactic is to "balance" it with some tiny fragment of non-information, repeated ad nauseum until it seems to be inflated to the same size as the truthful part - the John Kerry story is acceptable as long as it's packaged into a box of Swift Boat Veteran packing peanuts.

Yes, truth exists, and we have to stop being afraid of it. My rule is: it is OK to say anything as long as it is true and it is meant to do more good than harm. The "more good than harm" part must not be achieved by padding the bad news with neutrality fluff.

by mikel on 05/08/2006 01:04:30 PM EST

Journalism 101 (none / 0)
   Excellent writing on this,  it should be required reading for every journalist who has either consciously or unconsciously bowed to the idea of "fair and balanced" reporting as a refresher in Journalism 101.

  Sometimes things change in subtle ways and stages, and I have to admit that your words woke me up to the fact that I had really had my brain washed in terms of "equal time".

Thanks for pointing this out as being nonsense when it is used in dealing with the crucial issues that we now are facing in the U.S..  Your posts are always among the most important and clearly expressed that I read on Huffpo.

I looked up this website to read more. Its an excellent site.  Enjoying the video, especially the interview with Tom Harkin.   

by johnsnakecusak on 05/10/2006 02:45:40 AM EST

Truth exists (none / 0)

I think this is a very important piece. The difference between Objectivity and Neutrality rarely gets discussed. The Fairness Doctrine addressed neither, and instead required balance, hoping that objectivity would result. With the Doctrine gone, we now hear the call for neutrality, as if this is the same thing as objectivity.

Neutrality should never be the goal of reporting. Unfortunately, in its relentless clamor for neutrality, the right wing has succeeded in creating a dangerously biased media. It seems neutrality and bias are equality dangerous to our democracy. In contrast, objectivity is one of the gatekeepers for our freedoms.

Not only has objectivity suffered in our media, facts have also taken a beating. Republicans make a practice out of arguing over facts -- whether they are accurate, whether they are fair, whether they are relevant -- so that we can't get even begin to discuss what the truth might be.

If truth exists, the mainstream media is a long way from pursuing it with any vigor. Hopefully, sites like this one will have a lasting impact on the direction the media will take in the future. 

by cinea1 on 05/14/2006 12:10:39 AM EST

The Media Isn't Supposed to be Neutral | 5 comments (5 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: