The controversy regarding Professor Skube and his comments about blogging made it into our own local paper today. I think Skube is both right and wrong. I mean, most bloggers, such as myself are not journalists. And many bloggers are set in opinions from which they deviate very little. There is much rancor ill will and petty swiping of insults. But the question I have is not so much whether bloggers are journalists, but whether journalists are journalists.
The sentence above, “many bloggers are set in opinions from which they deviate very little” could just as well be applied to most journalists I read. Adding weeks and weeks of “research” and “fact checking” and whatever else are the standards of mainstream journalism to an immoveable position may actually make the result more and not less devoid of truth, and more dangerous, in that it simply lends an appearance of credibility to the deeply held bias.
The vast majority of journalists vote democratic and are on the left side of the political spectrum here in the US. Within their own inner ring I am sure they feel very objective. And the fact that there is always somebody more liberal than a given journalist does not help really. It lends a false sense of balance. Just because someone is to the left of you doesn’t mean you’re in the middle.
For me, journalism should be about a passion for truth, whether that truth fits with preconceived positions or not. Perhaps amidst the cacophony of talk radio, blogging, Fox News and the like, all of which exist and thrive to some degree due to the bias of traditional journalism, maybe people are finding something more like a real balance. But maybe not. They may just be getting hardened in their preset positions, whether right or left leaning, and whatever truth is may be receding at an even faster clip.
But in the end I don’t think so. This chaotic mess of voices from all sides probably gets us closer to a balanced understanding of things, well, if we can just listen.
Friday, August 24, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
11 comments:
"The vast majority of journalists vote democratic and are on the left side of the political spectrum here in the US."
The point of this sentence? I don't think you mean to imply that left-leaning journalists are more likely to let bias slip through than right-leaning journalists, but that's what it sounds like.
Also, what percentage of US journalists vote democratic and are affiliated with the left?
No, I simply meant to convey that journalists have political bias, as individuals, and as a group. The same issues would apply to the minority of journalists who are right leaning. Thanks for the clarification.
The last stat I remember hearing this year had the percentage at upper 80's.
It's actually closer to 40 percent. Not quite a vast majority, or even a majority.
Good point Joel. I am less and less impressed with "journalist" as chroniclers of facts. But then before the internet and access to so many more opinions both of journalists, records, stats and bloggers we really had no way of comparing stories so what we read in our chosen daily news paper and favorite TV Nightly News "talking head" was what we had to rely on. Now that we have access to so much more information the title of “Journalist” is indeed showing itself to be a label given to biased individuals no better than our opinionated bloggers with the one distinction of being paid for writing their opinions.
As for bloggers being journalists, well I for one am a blogger who would feel insulted to be placed in that category given my contempt for the supercilious attitude of the “journalist” I am familiar with (with just a few exceptions). I am however a fairly intelligent person who tried to be well informed for the major portion of my life and who now is taking the opportunity to send my hard learned lessons and opinions out to who ever wishes to read them. I am a blogger, short and sweet. (Well maybe not so “short” since as I have often admitted to, I would rather use ten words where one would do.) BB
Anthony, your link suggests twice as many journalists identify themselves as Democrat as those that self-identify Republican.
What your link does not seem to describe is the percentage who vote Democratic, particularly in presidential elections. That is the statistic that I believe Joel is closer to describing.
Joe Guarino
Found this tidbit off MSNBC's web site:
"MSNBC.com identified 143 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign, according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 16 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties."
I am certain that the figure I heard or read recently put the figure at close to 90% of journalists voting for someone other than the Republican candidate. I was not referring to party affiliations but voting records.
But it does not take a political scientist to detect the bias. It's really quite obvious if you're on the other side of it.
I kind of laugh at the chart in the American Journalist article cited above, in that the criteria used amount to the journalist's self perception. It's an interesting study in self perception. The same article started out saying:
"In findings likely to fuel the raging debate over the issue of media bias, a new book concludes that the nation’s journalists have moved a bit to the right since the 1990s, but are still considerably more liberal than the general public."
Well, you may be right regarding voing patterns. Earlier today I found a link to a study that had a number close to what you mentioned - 80% voting Democrat, or something like that. Unfortunately I can't find the link again. However, it was an old study, from the 70s or 80s. Considering that the study I linked earlier showed a slight rightward shift, it wouldn't surprise me to find it less than 80% now, but it still may be close enough to a "vast majority" that I'll withdraw my criticism, at least WRT voting patterns.
Rule 1 of good journalism is attribution. Guys, where are you getting these numbers of so called liberal reporters?
With FoxTV and talk radio are conservatives really worried the media is too left?
By the way...we all have bias, but good journalism leaves that for the editorial page.
Bill,
I did make an attribution in the comment above, as did anthony. But I am not a journalist, remember :)
The point of my article was to interact with Professor Skube's claims about bloggers. My point was that many of the things he find unsavory about bloggers I find unsavory about the folks in his profession, even the ones who follow the rules, etc. I am referring to mainstream newspaper, television and radio journalists, people who do claim to be real journalists. I think that they are less objective than they think they are. They tend as a group to be biased, and their journalism reflects their bias. It does not matter to me so much what their bias is. I did not intend this as a hit upon liberal media per se. But because the bias comes through so clearly, because the journalistic world seems so bent in one direction, it loses its objectivity and ability to be conveyors of truth. I don't think this is any sort of conspiracy. I just think journalists as human beings operate from the starting point of their own worlds views, and this impacts their ability to be objective truth tellers.
Post a Comment