Bias for Obama?
Editors and staffers here are aware of the desire and need to maintain objectivity in our coverage of the presidential campaign. That can be done by matching every word written or photo used on a daily basis — not the easiest or smartest method — or by balancing our overall report as it plays out over the campaign.
Seems to me we fell behind on the bias-scorecard this past Sunday. The overall weight and tone of Sunday’s paper seemed to carry a pro-Obama tone.
The Page One story, headline and display were balanced. The two stories on A4 properly reported Clinton’s dropping out of the race — the news event of the day.
“Hillary Clinton — her concession: Unqualified support for Obama” “Hillary Clinton — her campaign: They never saw this coming, a friend said”
But the fawning Cox News Service story and headline on A5 was excessively declarative.
“Barack Obama — A revolution in politics: Personifying the change America is yearning for“
(McCain’s name has yet to appear in bigger type than the secondary headline on Page One. “Electoral map may be up for grabs. Both McCain and Obama look for signs of shifting voting patterns.”)
Add the two-thirds-of-a-section-front display of an Obama campaign worker in NewsWatch, and things seem way skewed for Obama.
“A passion for politics. A tireless ambition. A goal in sight.”
Those words no doubt spoke of the Obama intern featured in the text and multiple photos — and not the candidate. But on the bias-meter, is that much of a distinction?
One staffer questioned Monday’s A3 headline as well:
“Obama, McCain: Vivid contrasts. Race may hinge on whether nation wants the new, hip thing, or the old reliable.”
One can certainly argue that the old reliable is quite a compliment. But that argument didn’t ring true to the staffer.
One of our political writers cautioned that we not lose sight of the bigger picture — balance over the long haul. The writer notes that McCain campaign visits here in March resulted in two consecutive days of top of Page One coverage. Obama’s appearance in February at the Edward Jones Dome — which drew a record crowd here for a political rally — was displayed on Page A5.
Guilty of bias this past Sunday?
I would argue that Sunday’s Obama excess wasn’t intentional on the part of our editors and staffers. Still, there it was, in print, adding up to whatever readers judge it to be. I’d suggest an Alford Plea on the part of all involved and a resolve to keep things balanced overall.
(Life And Its Challenges Department: Obama visits here tonight and tomorrow.)
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Steve -
I predict (through the use of my all-seeing crystal ball) that some will say you:
a) were overly biased toward Senator Obama;
b) were not fair at all to Senator Obama;
c) your coverage was “just right”.
Good luck and congratulations on your bravery for raising the question.