-
ADD TIME NEWS
- MOBILE APPS
- NEWSLETTERS
Yes We Can (Disclose Our Votes)
Having made a personal hobbyhorse of the idea that journalists should disclose who they're voting for (see my argument here), I thought I should point you to Slate, which continues its tradition from 2000 and 2004 of inviting its staffers to announce who they're voting for. It's 55 to 1 to 1 in favor of Obama. That's right: at Slate, Bob Barr tied John McCain.
I write this not as evidence that the larger media is or isn't for Obama; Slate's a center-left opinion site, which went overwhelmingly for the Democrat the last two times out too. (The margin was bigger for Obama this time, but it was a landslide every time.) But it's a practice that more journalists should follow, because (1) there's a difference between having a preference and acting on it through your work and (2) hiding said preferences doesn't make you any more fair. (All those journalists who don't tell you who they're voting for? They're going to vote for somebody too!)
But the political teams at CNN, Fox, the New York Times and the Washington Post are not going to volunteer to be first to do it, so this change will only happen gradually, if publications like Slate—and non-Washington writers like me—do it first.
Which is why I've told you, ad nauseam, that I'm voting for Obama (and by now feel pretty boring for it). I've made a point, though, of not telling you why I'm voting for Obama. The reason, I guess, is that while I think it's worthwhile for you to take my vote into consideration, once I start explaining my vote I'm going from disclosing to advocating. I'm the TV critic: I doubt anyone gives a crap what I think about clean coal.
Still, if you don't think that sort of thing is too much information, the Slate crew goes into considerable detail, one of them in haiku form.
-
1
I wonder, though, James...at what point does a disclosed vote become an endorsement? Most reporters don't have that kind of influence yet, but a few do. I could see at the start of an election cycle a few high-end reporters like Helen Thomas or Bob Woodward being courted by a campaign for a vote. That would greatly interfere with their ability to report ON a candidate (like how Oscar voters are treated during awards season).
And then, what about full news institutions, like The Washington Post? You could say that they are left-leaning, but thinking back to the primaries, it was a bloody battle between Hillary and Obama, and an endorsement of either of them--not just by the editorial board, but by 85% of the staff-- would have made a difference.
-
2
I'm still not convinced that such disclosure is a good idea. I'm not a reporter, but as the program director for a public TV station, I've always believed that my editorial role requires me to play my political cards close to the chest.
It doesn't matter whether or not (in my case, not) I act on my political preferences when selecting programs for our schedule. My experience has been that the sort of people who accuse us of bias pay no heed to our overall work. "You're biased" inevitably translates to "You ran this one show in which this one guy said something I didn't like." (And even though we've been accused both of being too conservative and too liberal, no one has ever accused us of being biased IN FAVOR of their own side.)
I don't see what's gained by giving them a match and a can of gas. They're never going to say, "Their program director may be a Ron Paul supporter, but look at how even-handed he is." It's going to be "You ran that show in which that guy said that Ron Paul was a snappy dresser, and I will never support you again because of your obvious Ron Paul bias." (Granted, they may say that anyway, but I've got no desire to "confirm" their media bias fantasies.)
Perception is everything, and as long as there's such a concerted effort by certain well-placed, strident parties to firmly plant the idea of a "liberal media" (or, to a lesser extent, a conservative one), the reality of how those of us with the responsibility to be "fair and balanced" actually do our jobs makes no difference to the howling hordes.
Yes, twenty-plus years working in broadcast TV has made me exactly this cynical.
Most Popular »
- Best of the Decade: Sci-Fi Movies
- CNN Poll: Man Made Global Warming Takes a Hit
- "How Will Dave Ever Make Fun of Sex Scandals Again?"
- Why Wells Fargo isn't paying back TARP
- Is Harry Reid Burning Out?
- How Will Obama Pay For Stimulus 2.1? (or 3.0, 3.1, whatever you want to call it)
- War of the Supermen: Q&A With Matt Idelson
- The Health Reform Abortion Wars, Part Deux
- A Jobs Speech with Elbows
- Economists Growing More Wary of the Senate Health Bill
- The Truth Behind the Leaked Climate-Change E-Mails
- Mexico Witness Protection: Corrupt Program, New Killings
- Tiger Woods Must Face His Fans' Moral Outrage
- Helicopter Parents: The Backlash Against Overparenting
- Taiwan: World's Lowest Birthrate Could Affect Society
- Creating Jobs: Can Obama Government Boost Employment?
- How Strong Is the Evidence Against Amanda Knox?
- U.S. Doesn't Know Where bin Laden Is; Time to Let Go
- Humanure: Goodbye, Toilets. Hello, Extreme Composting
- Suspect Headley: Pakistani Terrorist Group Going Global?













RSS