Readers Respond to 'Bias' Column

By: Greg Mitchell At least one issue seems to unite left, right and center these days: everyone seems interested in fresh allegations of "liberal bias" in newsrooms. My most recent online column, posted last week, announcing that E&P was launching a major probe of this subject, drew a record response, with dozens of readers offering encouragement, advice and warnings.

Mixed in were a few condemnations from the left ("You are merely validating a myth") and right ("Everyone knows it's true"). Apparently some have made up their minds already. But we will approach this as open-minded as possible, looking for nuance, and focusing on the "fannies in the seats" in actual newsrooms, how reporters and editors get there, and what happens after they do.

A former editor claimed he rarely met a job applicant who was conservative, saying he could "count the number on one hand" over many years of hiring at a smaller paper. A current reporter asserted that conservatives simply feel unwelcome at many papers. Here's a selection of other reader comments:

John Leo, columnist, U.S. News and World Report: "Well, the last thing anybody would want is a conservative quota. But I think editors should try to have diversity (god, I hate that word) in editorial conferences--people of all backgrounds, religions and opinions. We all know that conferences changed the day the first black attended. And it was a very good thing ... I don't care how many Democrats or liberals there are in the newsroom, so long as we do something to change the one-note newsroom culture."

Paul Moll: "I don't think instituting some sort of ideological affirmative action in newsrooms is the answer. A news organization should be what it is; it should embrace its nature. The New York Times, L.A. Times, CNN etc. are liberal. So what? There are lots of liberal people who read and watch their product. Audiences will eventually gravitate toward the media they are comfortable with."

Sherry Sylvester, director, Texas Media Watch: "Buried deep in a Center for Media and Public Affairs study released in July last year was a section on regional newspapers. Only four were examined, but the findings were intriguing ... they found more 'partisan slant' in the regional press than in the two major papers studied, The New York Times and The Washington Post -- and the major television networks. I monitor five metropolitan daily papers in Texas and routinely find a partisan and ideological slant."

Jerry Lanson, chair, Journalism Dept., Emerson College, Boston, Mass: "No question, the issue of truth is a tricky one. But ... if the press has a bias it is toward playing things carefully down the middle, sometimes at the expense of context...The real issue here is not the tug-of-war over who can influence press coverage by calling it names. The real issue is whether we, as journalists, simply play it down the middle or look to build a contextual framework for news that establishes one viewpoint as much closer to the truth than another."

Jerry Carroll, Hot Springs Village, Ariz.: "Having somebody like you in charge of investigating liberal bias in the media is like, oh, putting Reynard the Fox on the case of the chicken house break-in."

Will Bunch: "I've been a journalist for 23 years, mostly at Newsday and now the Philadelphia Daily News. I don't think the problem is editors not hiring conservatives. How many times does a conservative walk into an editor's office and seek a job? Probably not too often. In spite of my own views, I honestly wish there were more conservatives [in the newsroom]. I would welcome the ideological diversity. But I think it's an idea that runs contrary to human nature. People don't grow up to become journalists in a vacuum. They became journalists because of their beliefs and personality traits, which usually include a willingness to question authority, wanting to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable, and being able to see shades of gray in complicated public issues. In a not so amazing coincidence, those are the exact same traits that drive a person to be liberal."

Valerie Cribbs, Cherry Valley, Calif.: "Perhaps the majority of journalists and newscasters really are liberal, but what about the owners? Ultimately it is them, not the talking heads and writers, that decide what will and will not be aired."

Thomas Russell, Lafayette, Ind.: "What is objectivity? Name publications that meet this definition. Is E&P an objective publication? Is it reasonable to expect that a journalist can be dispassionate and coldly objective despite his or her political and/or social-issue point of view? A conservative reporter and a liberal reporter cover a fire: will their reports be the same? A conservative reporter and a liberal reporter cover a pro-abortion rally: will their reports be the same?"

Sue Hoell Campbell, Helena, Mont.: "To determine if the press is, overall, biased, we must first define the word biased. Most journalists believe the world is round rather than flat. This is not biased. It is a conclusion based on the weight of evidence. The press should not be measured in terms of right or left. The press should only be measured in terms of accuracy, fairness and removal of spin."

Bill Steigerwald, associate editor/columnist, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: "The way to determine, with any degree of scientific accuracy, how liberal the newspaper rank and file are, is to devise a series of questions on specific issues, on their influences, on their political/ideological heroes, etc. Asking them to identify themselves is worthless, because most of the liberals I know barely realize they are liberal, mainly because they never meet nonliberals, rarely read conservative magazines or columnists or authors and think that The New York Times editorial page and The New Yorker (all they read) are moderate."