In another blog, one of our more liberal bloggers sources al jazeera, claiming them to be "more objective" of a source than Fox News.

EXCUSE ME?

Al Jazeera, while a legitimate news organization in its region, has a long standing history of sympathy to terrorist organizations and their objectives (of course, the liberals deem these terrorists "Freedom Fighters", but I digress). While its research should not be utterly dismissed, it should definitely be taken with a huge measure of salt.

This leads me to wonder if there really IS such a thing as an "objective" news outlet.

Growing up in Enid, Oklahoma, our hometown paper was rather conservative. This was not surprising, as a perusal of advertising sold in the paper was sold to businesses owned by conservative leaders in the community (virtually ALL the big business there was owned by conservatives). In Oshkosh, Wisconsin, the same deal (they even went so far as to print a "clip and carry" copy of a ballot, with all the paper's endorsed candidates marked conveniently for the reader to copy). An examination of Madison Wisconsin newspapers shows a decided bias to the left. Essentially, print media, at least, reflects closely the demographics of the region. While they often allow an opposing countrpoint, its usually in political arenas that are not highly controversial.

Televised and radio media is no different. The bias of the media is quite literally tied to the ones who pay the bills. Would Elizabeth Smart's kidnapping and recovery have been so widely propagated if the Smarts were not the neighbors of the Van Susterns (specifically, Greta?) Given the number of missing and exploited children in the United States, I think it highly unlikely. And in my own experience I can cite the failure to bring media attention to help a burned church in my own hometown (while I lived in Wisconsin), while Reggie White was able to muster every reporter with an available microphone to aid in his church's rebuilding, despite the fact that the money was later apparently embezzled (although NOT by Reggie White).

Media is not objective. It is not, and never has been. Much like my own blog site, it is subject to the bias of those who write the stories (does anyone have the number of AP feeds per month that are completely IGNORED, on average?), and such bias does make for larger readership. Media is not a nonprofit business, and their articles are geared towards one end: MAKING MONEY.

A responsible response to media sources with a decided bias would be to evaluate several different sources, and, if possible, the source data (unedited interview transcripts, poll data, etc), before making a hard conclusion. Or, you could go the easy road and blame the media for misinforming you.

Respectfully submitted (last sentence tongue in cheek),

Gideon MacLeish