 |
Readers' CornerOmbudsman Dave Mazzarella answers reader questions about Stars and Stripes. |
Bad news
Posted August 30th, 2007 by Dave MazzarellaThree reports bearing bad news emerged recently.
One said that more than half of Americans believe the media are politically biased, inaccurate and don't care about the people they report on. (Source: The Pew Research Center via AFP news service,)
Another, from the Committee to Protect Journalists, said as many as 112 journalists and 40 news support individuals had been killed in Iraq since March, '03.
The third report, from the Project for Excellence in Journalism research group, said the news media's coverage of the Iraq war had dropped. Their attention shifted in the second quarter of this year toward the presidential campaign.
No one is saying these developments are related, but they are disconcerting nonetheless.
The public's critical assessment of the press is part of a trend that researchers have noticed for years. This survey also found that 53 per cent of one segment of news consumers, those who are Internet users, believe news organizations do not "stand up for America." Many see newspeople as arrogant know-it-alls.
Despite the public's dwindling confidence in the American media, and despite the shortcomings of the media itself, journalists continue to toil in the face of danger. Their death toll in Iraq has been the highest of any war in modern times. (The majority of these casualties were Iraqis, many of whom worked for U.S. news organizations.)
Finally, the drop in coverage of Iraq raises the question: Where are the media's -- and the public's -- priorities? The election of an American president is of tremendous importance. But there are still many in the field of candidates, we are months away from the first primary, and the determining vote is more than a year off. In the meantime, the Iraq war grinds on toward a showdown over how long American troops -- some dying almost every day -- will remain in combat.
The media reacts to what it perceives its consumers want, or don't want. It's possible news organizations discern war fatigue among the public. That's sad, but not surprising. Long-running stories have that effect. Does the public's low marks for the press have anything to do with a dropoff of interest in the war? There has been controversy over coverage of Iraq. But it would be a real blow to the profession if the questions about the media's accuracy and fairness were driving readers and viewers away from news of the war in Iraq -- even while journalists were dying there at such an alarming rate.
Open your eyes
Dave, I sent you this individually and will now share it reference -- in part -- your first point:
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/DeLay_Craig_Lauer/2007/08/31/28934.ht...
Lord knows this is the absolute truth. I see it ALL
THE TIME, in terms of column inches, in terms of font
size on headlines, tone and facial expressions of
broadcast journalists, and as Mr. DeLay says, the
shameless propensity of insufferable liberals to
continue to drag conservatives through the mud without
end while turning a virtual blind eye to trash like
Jefferson and so many others who inexplicably remain
on the scene. I pray for the day when all Americans
wake up and see far-left liberals for what they are.
On those other initial points: yes, they are largely inaccurate because of the bias and lack of balanced reporting. Do they care about the people they report on? I rather imagine in most cases they remain detached and do not. There may be some cases where they do. It depends on the story and the reporter.
Well Dave...
...since you decided once again to take a perfectly thoughtful and reflective piece and turn around and politicize it, I'll jump in here and enlighten you about your perceived media bias. First of all, DeLay is known as a criminal and the "poster child" of corruption with zero credibility, (even the republicans don't want him around because he is an embarrassment) so anything he says can be discarded. Now, do you want to know why the media (catering to the wants of their readers) give attention to right-wing scandals? It’s about the hypocrisy Dave. You see the right are seen by voters as being delusional in that they think they have some kind of moral high ground, particularly in regards to the religious influence on issues that they campaign on. So when a senator, let’s say who has taken a stance against gay rights, is later caught soliciting gay sex in a public toilet, it's much more interesting to readers and voters because of the hypocrisy.
If you want a little background on corruption in congress, check this out: http://www.beyonddelay.org/ It list scandals of both democrats (including W. Jefferson) and republicans, but I think you will find that your republicans damn near have a monopoly on corruption. Happy reading Dave...
Good and bad news
Yes, I must agree, they are three very interesting reports. I admit that I am with the majority of Americans that feel the media is biased and often inaccurate. However, media is a very broad term encompassing print, television and radio. I do believe that print media generally does the best job in unbiased reporting. In fact, I praise the Stars and Stripes for their recent coverage of the Senator Craig scandal. I felt it was very neutral coverage that represented the facts. Also, I feel the Stripe’s war coverage has been excellent! The stories are accurately and neutrally reported.
Then I open today’s paper (September 3rd, Middle East edition), and on page 14 I see “Clooney: Barack Obama has the aura of a rock star”. I have no idea what this story is trying to convey other than this actor’s political opinions. Apparently the Associated Press and the Stripes felt that a popular actor’s political opinions are newsworthy and worth a dedicated article. In fact, the Stripes did not even feel the need to print the article on the opinion page, opting instead for the "faces" section. The story appears to go out of its way to show that Mr. Clooney praised the junior senator for speaking out against the war. I wonder how newsworthy a conservative republican actor’s opinions would be.
Now as for the other report, I had no idea that many reporters had died covering Iraq. I thank each reporter for their sacrifice in ensuring free speech. The study said 84 were confirmed as the result of insurgent activity. I wonder how much higher that number would be if the insurgents operated with impunity.