We work hard to avoid news coverage bias
One of the basic lessons print journalists must learn is to keep their opinions out of their writing.
But, in spite of our best efforts, things do sometimes slip by, generally in stories that come to us from other sources.
We are, however, individuals with different life experiences, different perspectives and very different opinions. That's why we are supposed to keep them to ourselves. We aren't allowed to put political bumper stickers on our cars or wear political buttons. If things go as they should, our opinions and our jobs exist in parallel universes, never intersecting.
In spite of that, readers persist in expressing their perception that our newspaper has a political bias. In fact, readers on both sides of the aisle have voiced their opinions about bias in our stories.
One reader this week complained about two briefs on a "yourWORLD" page that included quotations from
President Barack Obama: "He said the ambitious budget plan he presented Thursday will help millions of people, but only if Congress overcomes resistance from deeppocket lobbies." A second brief, also about national budget concerns, referred to "powerful interests that oppose parts of his plan . . ."
The reader expressed his opinion that "this is a blatant attempt under the cover of news to present opponents of the big government socialist grab by Obama as 'deeppocket lobbies' and 'powerful interests' and not just people who prefer capitalism."
Though we disagree with that opinion, and think the stories were actually about "deep-pocket lobbies" and "powerful interests," we certainly defend his right to express his concerns.
Conversely, another writer, complaining about the many changes in The Enterprise had a list of concerns, including: "I don't like that its (got) a republican (stet) bias either."
So, there you have it. Both sides think we are biased. Obviously that doesn't mean we are doing everything right, but it does offer a bit of evidence that we continue to try. We know we can't make all of the people happy all of the time, but at least, maybe we can alternate who gets angry.
Another reader on Monday sent a rather vague e-mail criticizing columns that he said had a strong Democratic slant. Specifically, he said, "Every article this man writes is negative," but he didn't specify which man he was chastising.
So, I asked for more specifics, hoping for enlightenment that might guide my response. He was specifically referencing Clay Robinson, but he also took time to criticize Rick Casey and Lisa Falkenburg. That clarification gave me the opportunity to do something exceedingly rare: unequivocally deny any bias or political preference exhibited by those columnists in The Enterprise. The work of those columnists doesn't run in The Beaumont Enterprise -- they are all Houston Chronicle columnists.
My best story about political bias is based on the 2000 conventions of the two major political parties. Our editors were so concerned about fairness of the conventions that we mapped out a plan well in advance about front page presence, number of photos, size of headlines -- everything as detailed as possible, factoring in the unpredictability of breaking news.
The Democratic convention was first and the Republicans complained. Then came coverage of the Republican convention and the Democrats complained.
One obviously Democratic woman called screaming through the phone line because The Enterprise front page that day featured a photo of former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani speaking at the Republican convention. I tried to share information on our planning and efforts at balancing coverage, but she was not to be dissuaded from her beliefs.
"He's an adulterer. You put an adulterer's photo on the front page of MY newspaper. How dare you!" she screamed.
Unable to resist the temptation, I th my line of reasoning concerning our well-planned coverage, pointing out, "Yes, but during the Democratic convention, we ran a photo of Bill Clinton on the front page."
She completely missed the point. Obviously it's a Republican joke. Please forgive me.
But, in spite of our best efforts, things do sometimes slip by, generally in stories that come to us from other sources.
We are, however, individuals with different life experiences, different perspectives and very different opinions. That's why we are supposed to keep them to ourselves. We aren't allowed to put political bumper stickers on our cars or wear political buttons. If things go as they should, our opinions and our jobs exist in parallel universes, never intersecting.
In spite of that, readers persist in expressing their perception that our newspaper has a political bias. In fact, readers on both sides of the aisle have voiced their opinions about bias in our stories.
One reader this week complained about two briefs on a "yourWORLD" page that included quotations from
President Barack Obama: "He said the ambitious budget plan he presented Thursday will help millions of people, but only if Congress overcomes resistance from deeppocket lobbies." A second brief, also about national budget concerns, referred to "powerful interests that oppose parts of his plan . . ."
The reader expressed his opinion that "this is a blatant attempt under the cover of news to present opponents of the big government socialist grab by Obama as 'deeppocket lobbies' and 'powerful interests' and not just people who prefer capitalism."
Though we disagree with that opinion, and think the stories were actually about "deep-pocket lobbies" and "powerful interests," we certainly defend his right to express his concerns.
Conversely, another writer, complaining about the many changes in The Enterprise had a list of concerns, including: "I don't like that its (got) a republican (stet) bias either."
So, there you have it. Both sides think we are biased. Obviously that doesn't mean we are doing everything right, but it does offer a bit of evidence that we continue to try. We know we can't make all of the people happy all of the time, but at least, maybe we can alternate who gets angry.
Another reader on Monday sent a rather vague e-mail criticizing columns that he said had a strong Democratic slant. Specifically, he said, "Every article this man writes is negative," but he didn't specify which man he was chastising.
So, I asked for more specifics, hoping for enlightenment that might guide my response. He was specifically referencing Clay Robinson, but he also took time to criticize Rick Casey and Lisa Falkenburg. That clarification gave me the opportunity to do something exceedingly rare: unequivocally deny any bias or political preference exhibited by those columnists in The Enterprise. The work of those columnists doesn't run in The Beaumont Enterprise -- they are all Houston Chronicle columnists.
My best story about political bias is based on the 2000 conventions of the two major political parties. Our editors were so concerned about fairness of the conventions that we mapped out a plan well in advance about front page presence, number of photos, size of headlines -- everything as detailed as possible, factoring in the unpredictability of breaking news.
The Democratic convention was first and the Republicans complained. Then came coverage of the Republican convention and the Democrats complained.
One obviously Democratic woman called screaming through the phone line because The Enterprise front page that day featured a photo of former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani speaking at the Republican convention. I tried to share information on our planning and efforts at balancing coverage, but she was not to be dissuaded from her beliefs.
"He's an adulterer. You put an adulterer's photo on the front page of MY newspaper. How dare you!" she screamed.
Unable to resist the temptation, I th my line of reasoning concerning our well-planned coverage, pointing out, "Yes, but during the Democratic convention, we ran a photo of Bill Clinton on the front page."
She completely missed the point. Obviously it's a Republican joke. Please forgive me.
posted by Sheila Friedeck at 3:42 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home