Paul Krugman's lament in the Times focuses on the TV news media and ignores the print media, as though bias has only a video home. By omitting examples in the print trade, he backhandedly suggests that print media 's bias is non-existent.
Krugman quotes his hero, Al..."This week Al Gore said the obvious. "The media is kind of weird these days on politics," he told The New York Observer, "and there are some major institutional voices that are, truthfully speaking, part and parcel of the Republican Party." Krugman continues... "The reaction from most journalists in the "liberal media" was embarrassed silence. I don't quite understand why, but there are some things that you're not supposed to say, precisely because they're so clearly true. Cable television has greatly expanded the range of available entertainment, but has had far less broadening effect on news coverage. There are now five major sources of TV news, rather than three, but this increase is arguably more than offset by other trends. For one thing, the influence of print news has continued its long decline; for another, all five sources of TV news are now divisions of large conglomerates - you get your news from AOLTimeWarnerGeneralElectricDisneyWestinghouseNewsCorp.
Krugman concludes... "Do the conflicts of interest of our highly concentrated media constitute a threat to democracy? I've reported; you decide."
Let's not forget that bias is merely opinion, albeit institutional opinion that may improperly sway people. Bias is prevalent in all media and the targets of bias, Republicans and Democrats alike, should continually point out when it is blatant. Bias has always existed, but thoughtful readers and viewers should recognize and filter it when evaluating news and commentary. Unfortunately, our time pressed, channel surfing, page flipping, viewing and reading habits seldom foster a discriminating and thoughtful approach to the news...wherever we find it.
No comments:
Post a Comment