Putting 'Liberal Bias' in Context

I've been following the case of The Record of Bergen County, New Jersey, the newspaper where the publisher announced last month that the paper's newsroom staff would be investigating itself on charges of liberal bias. I don't know the folks at The Record, and have no idea how their investigation is going. But their example has gotten me thinking about this issue again.

News organizations should revisit their work (as well as the work of colleagues) from time to time. Journalism is a social science, and testing previous work is an important part of social science. But setting out to find examples of "liberal bias" can devolve into cherry-picking: the citations that seem favorable to liberals make it into the report, but will anyone record the reports that favored conservatives? And what about the stories that the newsroom missed entirely? How might those omissions have skewed coverage?

Journalists also would be naive to address charges of "liberal bias" without acknowledging the recent history behind those claims.

In his book, "What Liberal Media?", author Eric Alterman described how the "liberal bias" claim began as a well-orchestrated attack on journalism by conservatives. Furthermore, Alterman got many conservative leaders to admit, on the record, that their charges were false and, simply, an example of conservatives "working the refs."

(Of course, conservatives might argue that Alterman, an avowed liberal, is himself too biased to refute charges of liberal bias. Reductio ad absurdum. Convenient.)

I read the transcript of Record editor Frank Scandale's conversation last week with NPR's Brooke Gladstone. The example that he cited, two photos of a Bush family appearance on a book tour, might best be described as sloppy photo editing. (The paper ran a two-column photo of Laura and Jenna Bush and three-column photo of three protesters. There was no photo of the many fans waiting in line to see the First Lady and her daughter.)

Folks on the left have used sloppy photo editing to criticize many other publications of conservative bias, such as when a small group of pro-war supporters get equal visual play with photos of a much-larger gathering anti-war protesters.

The proper response is to work out a policy with the photo desk on how public gatherings will be shot. Even if you've got a "great photo," that does not justify distorting the reality of an event.

The best self-examinations focus on these questions: "Did our coverage turn out to be true?" and "Was the context of our coverage accurate?" If the answers are "yes," then journalists have nothing to apologize for -- to conservatives or liberals. Journalists need to protect against institutional biases that prevent complete and accurate coverage. We should not be cowed by charges of "liberal bias," and warp our coverage in response.

Robert Niles also can be found at http://www.themeparkinsider.com