I Don't Believe the 'Bias Liberal Media' Bit
Posted: Tuesday, January 27, 2009
by Eugene Redstone
This morning I had a conversation with a good friend. I told him something that my local newspaper, the Houston Chronicle, had reported the day before. His response: "I don't care what the Houston Chronicle says." He doesn't believe the bias liberal media.
This has always fascinated me. From a young age, my children have commented on the occasional bumper sticker that they would see that would state, "I don't believe the bias liberal media." They didn't understand what the term "liberal" meant, but they did understand good grammar, which is what makes this bumper sticker stand out to them. (The term "bias" is not an adjective, though "biased" is.)
Now I consider myself to be pretty conservative, though I guess maybe I should let others decide that for themselves. Long ago I used to believe that the media had a liberal bias. Then we started getting complaints on SearchWarp that we were part of the liberal media elite. That really got me thinking.
The 3 sectors which are most universally considered "liberal" are 1. the arts, 2. the media, and 3. universities & colleges. Why do conservatives consider anything from these institutions as being, you know, the "L" word?
The Arts
Let's think about it. Art generally is considered something which is supposed to elicit emotion from the viewer or participant. The emotion is usually something along the lines of an awe of beauty. Art could also be an uncommon interpretation of something with a traditional meaning. By definition, things which are non-traditional or emotion inspiring are not usually considered conservative.
The Media
The job of the media is to report on multiple sides of a story, showing the reader or the viewer a perspective that they themselves might not find apparent. There is an inherent problem here, as 90% of the people might see one side of the story and 10% of the people might see the other side. The job of the news media is to present both sides, even though they are disproportional. The conservative side of a story, by nature of being conservative, often holds the traditional view which everyone is familiar with. To present the 10% which is less traditional and therefore less understood, the media must spend a disproportionate amount of their time explaining the 10%. I think this is often misunderstood as a "liberal bias" of the media.
Think about the recent Presidential campaign. One candidate proposed a continuation of the past military strategy of strengthening armaments and troops. The other candidate proposed talking with our enemies. Which strategy was traditional / conventional and which was a new way of looking at the situation? Which strategy needed more explanation and exploration? I think you would agree that talking with our enemies is much more intriguing than blowing them up. Exploring the uncommon tactic doesn't make the media biased toward the liberal end of the spectrum; it means that they are doing their job.
Universities and Colleges
Finally we come to universities, colleges and other institutions of higher learning. What is the job of these institutions? It is to take young adults and expand their knowledge by opening their minds to new ways of thinking and looking at situations. For some reason, being able to look at a situation from the point of view of others has become a "liberal" thing. I think we conservatives are shooting ourselves in the foot by allowing narrow-mindedness to become a known characteristic of conservatism. Regardless, it seems that being educated has become synonymous with being liberal. I think conservatism can not afford for this to be the case.
Finally, I am often reminded of the definition of liberal. Liberal means generous. Liberal means gracious. The root word which liberal comes from means "freeing "or "freedom" (hence the words "liberating" and liberty"). I have to ask you, when has this become a bad thing?
Added March 8th, 2010. I can't fight the religious superstition any longer. I must be Liberal if I have an open mind, conservatives would have it no other way. I understand that to look at things objectively means that I can no longer consider myself conservative. I give in. I am a Liberal, and proud of freedom and generosity as the word implies. I can't imagine why it has taken me so long to figure this out.
This Article has been viewed 1,094 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
More commentsA very good article Bruce which brings out some of the lousy situations that have occurred in our society. "Liberal" assuredly is a good word, but so is the word "gay" and there is nothing inherently wrong with the word "Negro". That is a legitimate and correct name for the race. But we have made dirty and ugly, many of the once good and decent words. It is difficult these days to know just what a person is saying at times. "Suck" has become an obscenity.Thanks Joel, you are correct!
Bruce,This is a great write! One that is compelling and quite the eye opener, and mind as well.There was a time when I began to question the true meaning of 'liberal' from the ways society is throwing it, but thanks to your article, I feel safe to know that the true meaning still exists!Thanks for sharing this with us!Thanks Ronyae for your very liberal compliments!You're more than welcome!
I loved this article. As a former journalism teacher this topic shakes loose a lot of my memories and opinions. To me everything is a continuum of bias, we all have them some to great degree others to lesser degree. I wish we could have fact gatherers clearly labeled and insanely dedicated to facts ONLY, followed by commentators clearly stating that they are taking facts and applying them to their opinion. Op-Ed and Facts. The problem is, even in gathering facts, and fitting facts into the available time, or space your choices of facts becomes a degree of bias and a reflection of the fact gatherer’s assumptions and opinions.While I consider myself LIBERAL I am tired of the term because the word is a big red button that fires off negative reactions. Are liberals really for BIG government and conservatives for a government small enough to drag into the bathroom and drown in the tub? Is either assumption fair? I am a liberal, but when I served as Senior Warden of my church and we had a budget shortfall, I had no problem pushing to terminate two assisting priests, cutting outreach, and tightening the spending. Does this sound like a tax and spend liberal?What I want to be is pragmatic. I don’t want big government or small government, but efficient effective government. I carry a sort of Bush-e coli that so sickens me that it is very difficult for me to even consider the opinions and suggestions of Republicans. I know this is not fair, but I’m being honest here and admitting that I’m still Bush-sick and I do blame the current economic and war complicated problems facing this country on Bush and on most Republicans. When the Republicans object to an Obama plan I hear myself shouting at the TV, “You guys had your chance. You guys caused these problems. Give the new guy a chance.”Nevertheless, if I can calm myself and I hear Republicans saying we should spend this rescue money on jobs that will be sustained rather than on short term projects I think, “Well, that does make some sense.”I just wish we were more focused on problem solving than on political gain and the protection of political turf. I also wished money grew on trees and that it rained beer every Friday after work.Very well stated, Tex, and thank you for being brave enough to call yourself liberal. From what I know about you, you are also very generous, so the term applies to you on multiple levels.
I've always wanted to be considered a pragmatist. I don't want to waste my time on politics, I just want to spend my efforts on what works."Bush e-coli" made me laugh out loud - extremely clever & accurate!! Can I hijack the term? I promise to give you credit!!
Bruce,I enjoyed reading your article but I must say (and I hope I'm not digging my grave on this one!) that I find the media very liberal. My beef is not that they are liberal, conservative, moderate or independent. Personally, I don't care. My beef is that they slant the news and do not report fairly on all sides.Last year Britt Hume reported that the Pew Research Center found from a survey of the media that the overwhelming majority of journalists were not conservative -- even commenting that those who pursue journalism tend to be Liberal because they like change! -- however, 2/3 of those surveyed admitted that their political leanings blurred the line between commentary and reporting. Incidentally, also found in the study was the lack of church or synagogue attendance by those in the media. Now, there's a surprise!Prior to the election, Time Magazine had Obama on the cover 12 times; McCain 5. There was no justification for that no matter which side of the fence you were on.Give us the news, but give us all sides of the news -- fairly -- without opinion. That's my motto.Thanks for your comments, Nancy. What I'm saying is that by the very nature of news being news, it is going to have a more "liberal" slant. Most news items are new, which by definition is less conservative and more progressive. I just don't believe that we conservatives should get too upset over this. I think it should be expected that the news media should spend more time explaining something new than what they spend explaining something old or traditional. I don't see how this makes them biased.
hi bruce,i don't really understand too much of all this governmental talk, but you did a great job writing this article. it was interesting and well written,my best regards,sueThanks Sue!
Bruce,I know I left a comment before, but this is the rating...very well done, SIR!
Bruce am I glad I am independent. Now I will debate you about education. Not that I disagree with much of what you said, but I have already written to my experience at a well known and established school in NJ. Thomas Jefferson quoted out of context and when I spoke up [can yo believe that of me no less?] she got incensed. I wound up with a B while everything I did all semester was A+. When I asked she said well because I had corrected her that night and she, not I, would shape the next generation as to ideology and belief. Out of her mouth. I tend to believe that is possible with the idealistic young. I too came up through Nam and the flowers. In my opinion people don't understand how one can be so diversified in beliefs. They think you must fit a mold. Sorry, not we individuals. That is what makes for good reading. best wishes, Robert.
I agree with both you and Robert on this one Bruce. I have also been a Republican for as long as I have been of voting age, but recently changed my political status to a democrat. But even as a republican, I can say because of coming up throught the Nam and flowers as Robert puts it, that at that time we became more deversified in our way of thinking, almost to the point of liberalism, but not quite. I agree with what you are saying, and if folks can't recognized that our generation is somewhat more liberal in our way of thinking, yet with conservative restraints is what I like to call it, then I believe most would absorbe what you are saying. Sometimes politics are so hard to write about...........Great article, and informative....well done. Your friend in pen.........GaryThanks for your compliments, Gary. I'd be interested in your opinion on this post.
Three cheers for Bruce! Excellent article. I'm with you on the media thing. I get tired of the liberal bias argument. A lot of people have argued that during the campaign the media was biased because it spent more time covering Obama than McCain. My reply is that McCain had a lot to do with that because it was McCain that put the focus on Obama. His whole campaign could have been summed up with the words "be afraid of Obama!" Had he have spent more time making his ideas known to the public things could have been different.Having said that, I have to agree with Robert on the education front. I think the education world is considerably more biased towards liberalism than the media front.Thanks for your compliments, Aaron. I know you walk the talk, so I greatly value your opinion. I'd be interested in what you have to say about this post.
Interesting article, Bruce. I agree that we should probably stop using terms like "liberal" and "conservative." They can be nuanced to death, as you have just proved. So let's use "left-wing" and "right-wing" instead. Now, is there a left-wing bias the in mainstream media? You're darn right there is, but not nearly as much as some people seem to believe.In most MSM outlets, I would rate it at about a 4 on a scale of 1 to 10. Compare that to a right-wing bias of about 6 on Fox News. Of course, we have exceptions like MSNBC, with a left-wing bias of about 8. These biases don't come from an effort to report both sides of a story, they come from an effort to report only one side of a story.I think it's interesting that some people will use studies reported by Fox News as evidence that the MSM has a left-wing bias. That's like using evidence provided by the McCoys to prove that the Hatfields are bad!
More comments
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.