“One thing is clear, this current election campaign season will finally put to rest the question of whether or not the Post-Dispatch has a left-wing biased agenda.”

Who is questioning whether the Post Disgrace is a left wing biased rag? That is common knowledge.

Anyone who thinks FOX news and Rupert Murdoch shills are fair and balanced should not write letters like this. If you have to state you’re fair and balanced, that means you’re not.

Mainstream media is not biased. If you think they were, do youthey were so kind to Bubba after he enjoyed the lip/mouth stylings of Monica? Of course not. He was raked over the coals to the point where a stellar presidency will always be defined by one mistake. On the other hand, you have a disaster of a presiency that doesn’t need any assist from the media to point out the malfeasance when the folks involved are coming out and telling how screwed up the Bush admin. is.

Anyway….mainstream media is not biased. If you think it is, then you probably think bush is a great president.

Geez, you GOP loving, fearmongering warbats think the Post is liberal?

All I’ve seen so far is purile kowtowing and bowing to the altar of Slick Johnny Mc and expect the mindless robots of Lee Publications to get in line with the rest of far right wing corporatist media in America and endorse McCain.

The Post has left the real stories of post-9/11 America behind, GOP fearmongering and a war in Iraq which keeps us from doling out justice to the murdering terrorists which attacked us on 9/11!

http://dangerousintersection.org/2006/11/09/real-terror-is-fear/

http://dangerousintersection.org/2006/08/13/afghanistan-democracy-is-drowning-in-illegal-drugs/

As long as corpoarte media keep distracting and distorting what real threats we face from lawlessness by the GOP and their warmongering stalking horses here and abroad, we need to vote Democratic!

The life you save might be your own!

Yeah, the media (including the Post) just didn’t uncritically sop up Bush’s lies and get us into a war in Iraq, where no one attacked us on 9/11.

sic and vicious, your fearmongering warbatism is uninformed and deceptive, like your GOP masters!Keep the drugs flowing!

http://dangerousintersection.org/2006/08/13/afghanistan-democracy-is-drowning-in-illegal-drugs/

http://dangerousintersection.org/2006/11/09/real-terror-is-fear/

Lester, I suggest you go back and read your first paragraph. Hilarious.

Sir, you use the logic in that paragraph, to claim, “A fish can Swim, a man can swim. Therefore, A man is a fish.”

You should stop watching Fox News. It makes the viewers irrational.

You just proved that.

Maybe you should seek counseling.

I do not believe the Post’s reporting is left sided though it is obvious that every editorial printed in the Post advocates the positions of the left. I don’t consider any newspaper’s editorials when formulating an opinion anyway, so that doesn’t bother me.

What does bother me is the Post’s selection of front page articles. Most of the stuff on the front page belongs in the Local section. Relevant, late-breaking national or world news belongs on the front page. The exceptions should be articles covering major regional/city news like earthquakes, floods, local election results, etc.

The PD was once asked about this and the reply I read in one of these blogs was basically that SINCE the news was local, it merits front page space. Sorry, but no matter how you try to slice and dice it, I just don’t think knowing how many dogs there are in a local animal shelter rates very high on my list of news I want to read about.

While concurring with your view of Mr. Russert’s exceptional journalistic skills, I must part company with your assessment of the P-D’s allegedly biased agenda. I would cite the P-D’s “point of view” columnists, Colleen Carroll Campbell (there’s three right there!), Z. Dwight Billingsly, and Terry Sater–not a lefty in the bunch. Furthermore, criticism of the current administration does not necessarily indicate bias, when 80% of the population agrees with the criticism. Finally, while a quick glance at Mr. Joseph Pulitzer’s statement on the paper’s mission (available in every edition) does indicate a tendency towards progressiveness (therefore, you should not be surprised by what you read in it), the P-D, in combination with the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Times, the New York Post, etc. equals diversity. Opinions is opinions; and the P-D is entitled to theirs. Many of the news stories come not from the Post Dispatch, but from the Associated Press. Could be you are barking at the wrong mailman.

Com Barker - could you please give me one example of a conservative columnist that actually works for the PD? Yes, the editorial pages have tried to give some balance to a totally progressive staff by having a few guest columnists and I have applauded those efforts and Jamie’s move towards balance in the published letters. However, the front page is grossly biased. Yes, I know those are AP retreads, but you would be amazed at the lack of coverage and the biased way it is presented and covered if you read it critically. Why do I have to go to alternative news sites daily to get “the rest of the news.” One I like is http://www.freerepublic.com.

LMAO!

http://www.infowars.com/?p=2698

Ms. Size,

The three columnists (as opposed to “journalists”) are all regular contributors to the P-D, in the employ of the P-D, paid by the P-D, and appear exclusively in the P-D. In my book, that means they “actually work for the P-D.” As far as nationally recognized syndicated columnists, I have seen George Will, Robert Novak, and Cal Thomas in the pages of past P-D issues. The choice of syndicated columnists is based more on financial considerations than ideologies.

I should point out that I only read the P-D online, as I live just north of Jefferson City. I haven’t read a hard copy of the P-D since I left St. Louis, some 25 years ago. Therefore, I do not consider myself an expert on their front page content. However, judging by their electronic version, I admit I am sometimes equally stymied by their omissions of what I consider newsworthy events (most recently the last observance of D-Day, and the Kucinich impeachment proposals). As far as going to “alternative news sites daily to get the ‘rest of the news’”, to be truly informed, this is MANDATORY. Each day, I visit at least six different news sources as diverse and eclectic as the Free Republic to Media Matters, to the Washington Post (my personal favorite), to Fox News, to Slate, to Newsday, to the Chicago Sun-Times. It is silly to rely on only one news source, be it NPR or Sean Hannity.

I’m intrigued by your example of the Free Republic. Do you consider them unbiased? Do you think they are without an agenda? Why is it they are so infrequently “sourced” by other news outlets?

Have you ever read “the Publisher’s Platform (Joseph Pulitzer III) in the P-D? It begins, “I know that my retirement…” This, more than anything else the P-D prints, exemplifies the editorial intent of the paper. It makes for good reading.