Election news coverage and bias

[Melissa426]

I am interested in others' opinions about television news coverage of the election. This post contains my opinions and may be full of generalizations. I know many of you think that should be strictly forbidden, so I am telling you that upfront if you want to stop reading.

ABC: Peter Jennings is Canadian, no? He hasn't obtained a U.S. citizenship , has he? I think his opinions aren't secret any more, ever since the Toby Keith debacle, but I felt on election night he was strongly in the Kerry camp. Early on, there was a small newsbite where a reporter noted the Kerry campaign was in really high spirits about the high voter turnout. You could tell that Jennings was almost gleeful about that tidbit. Pretty biased, I think.

CBS: I didn't watch any CBS, I can't stand Dan Rather, and I think it definitely would have been leaning towards the Kerry camp, but maybe I am wrong?

NBC: Most objective of all, IMHO.

CNN: Tried to not show bias, but didn't quite reach the mark. Kerry-leaning for sure.

Fox: No need to even comment. Almost a joke how much they were in the Bush camp.

In general, I found it laughable how unwilling to commit every network was about calling certain states. I guess it is understandable after they were burned in 2000.

Please feel free to offer contrasting or supporting opinions.

Peace,
Melissa

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Jennings is now a U.S. citizen.

http://www.usatoday.com/life/2003-07-08-jennings_x.htm


Regards,


Steve

 

[Flatlander]

You know, I'd heard that....

 

[loki09789]

Yup, noticed personal reporter reactions to the process too. I think it is unavoidable but as professionals you will come off more 'professionally' if you make the best effort to focus on the hard news (in this case) and not interject too many of your own slants on things.

The thing to remember too is that each of these news centers you mentioned - and every other one out there is like a person because they operate from a 'philosophy/mission statement' and will report/present in keeping with that foundation. If the philosophy is to be as objective as possible, then the managers/CEO have to make sure that the staff is doing that. If the philosophy is, as in FOX, to have 'bent' or to be 'harder on hard news' then the coverage will be like that....

In the end these are private industries that are motivated as much by profit and matching their product to a target consumer base as they are 'journalists'....

 

[Flatlander]

I watched the CBC coverage (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation), which is government funded, but operated at arms length. I was really surprised. Usually, CBC takes a very balanced approach to political issues internally. I have no recollection of them ever revealing any type of partisan bias - but this time they were definitely supporting Kerry. Not in a "slam Bush" kind of way, but certainly they were empathetic toward the Democrat campaign.

Oops, no, I made a mistake. At the World Cup of Hockey, the CBC sportscasters were definately biased in the commentary there. But politically? As I said, I was surprised to see it.

 

[Ender]

I watched and scanned all the news channels I could and found the local news shows to be fairest. Most did try "get it right" in light of what happened in 2000.

But it was very funny watching Dan Rather squirm and try to figure out a way that Kerry could win. The look of desparation in his eyes was a joy to behold! It was sooo sweeeet!*L

 

[PeachMonkey]

In the end these are private industries that are motivated as much by profit and matching their product to a target consumer base as they are 'journalists'....

Actually, profit is far more of a motive than any journalistic integrity.

 

[loki09789]

Actually, profit is far more of a motive than any journalistic integrity.

Let's expand that to credit and recognition/reputation as motivators as well....'reward' can take many forms .