Tuesday, November 18, 2008

BIG BIASED MEDIA

McCain/Palin may have lost the popular vote and the Electoral College but the biggest loser by a long shot this election cycle was the big biased media.

They squandered what little credibility they had left by being open and even unashamed advocates for the Democrat party and candidate Obama. Heck, at the Washing Post even their own ombudsman acknowledged the slanted, pro Obama presentation made by what is supposed to be one of the nations leading sources of the "news".

Polls showed that the American public felt that the reporting by the electronic and print media was blatantly biased. As the article that follows notes, the big biased media has dug itself into a very deep hole. Getting out will be difficult at best and, in fact, may not be possible. Trust has been lost and a vast array of information alternatives have gotten out of the barn. It is unlikely that they will disappear anytime soon.

The public, who are the customers in this arena, are voting with their wallets and their attention. Newspaper subscription rates remain is free fall. Advertisers are following the audience away from both network television news and print news, venturing forth into the world of alternative media like the Internet and talk radio. Money follows customers and the customers have abandoned the big biased media in numbers so significant as to threaten their existence.

What is most significant in that world of bias is the failure to recognize hard reality. Their priorities almost always place doctrine and condescension above profitability, even though they cannot survive as a business if they do not generate income. But as Murdoch emphasizes below, owners, editors and reporters are so dedicated to their selfish and narrow agendas that they care not if the organization suffocates to death from lack of revenue.

What media elites fail to recognize or understand is the inherent, instinctual intelligence of the American people. You can fool some of us all of the time and all of us some of the time, but you cannot fool all of us all of the time. And when we come to see that there are some among us who want to manipulate our behavior and thinking, we react by turning our backs on the manipulators, never to trust again as long as they or their kind are in charge. Traditionally, Americans reject those who try to control their lives and resist those who try to push them in directions that, in their gut, they know they do not want to go. That is how a free and independent people operate, survive and prosper.

The chasm where the big biased media now find themselves is deep and dark indeed. It will be a very, very long time before they might climb out and that journey will only begin once they prove to the public that they will present information in a fair, balanced and honest fashion. That process has not yet begun and even once it does, do not expect that trust will be restored in anything short of years, maybe even decades.

The information resource alternatives have established themselves and will prove hard to beat. The big biased media fouled their own nest and the stench is just too strong to attract favorable attention. We the people are fully capable of searching out the information we seek via the alternatives.

We will be doing so going forward.


Murdoch to media: You dug yourself a huge hole
Posted by Charles Cooper

With newspapers cutting back and predictions of even worse times ahead, Rupert Murdoch said the profession may still have a bright future if it can shake free of reporters and editors who he said have forfeited the trust and loyalty of their readers.

"My summary of the way some of the established media has responded to the Internet is this: it's not newspapers that might become obsolete. It's some of the editors, reporters, and proprietors who are forgetting a newspaper's most precious asset: the bond with its readers," said Murdoch, the chairman and chief executive officer of News Corp. He made his remarks as part of a lecture series sponsored by the Australian Broadcast Corporation.

Murdoch, whose company's holdings also include MySpace and the Wall Street Journal, criticized what he described as a culture of "complacency and condescension" in some newsrooms.

"The complacency stems from having enjoyed a monopoly--and now finding they have to compete for an audience they once took for granted. The condescension that many show their readers is an even bigger problem. It takes no special genius to point out that if you are contemptuous of your customers, you are going to have a hard time getting them to buy your product. Newspapers are no exception."

The 77-year-old Murdoch, recalling a long career in newspapers that began when his father's death forced him to take over the Adelaide News in 1952, said the profession has failed to creatively respond to changes wrought by technology.

"It used to be that a handful of editors could decide what was news-and what was not. They acted as sort of demigods. If they ran a story, it became news. If they ignored an event, it never happened. Today editors are losing this power. The Internet, for example, provides access to thousands of new sources that cover things an editor might ignore. And if you aren't satisfied with that, you can start up your own blog and cover and comment on the news yourself. Journalists like to think of themselves as watchdogs, but they haven't always responded well when the public calls them to account."

To make his point, Murdoch criticized the media reaction after bloggers debunked a "60 Minutes" report by former CBS anchor, Dan Rather, that President Bush had evaded service during his days in the National Guard.

"Far from celebrating this citizen journalism, the establishment media reacted defensively. During an appearance on Fox News, a CBS executive attacked the bloggers in a statement that will go down in the annals of arrogance. '60 Minutes,' he said, was a professional organization with 'multiple layers of checks and balances.' By contrast, he dismissed the blogger as 'a guy sitting in his living room in his pajamas writing.' But eventually it was the guys sitting in their pajamas who forced Mr. Rather and his producer to resign.

"Mr. Rather and his defenders are not alone," he continued. "A recent American study reported that many editors and reporters simply do not trust their readers to make good decisions. Let's be clear about what this means. This is a polite way of saying that these editors and reporters think their readers are too stupid to think for themselves."

Murdoch's comments come at a time when the media landscape looks increasingly bleak both for print-based and online news organizations. A recent report by Goldman Sachs predicted that advertising pressure will continue because of the declines in the auto and financial industries. Online outlets are also feeling the impact. On Friday, TheStreet.com shut its San Francisco office
Despite the blemishes, however, Murdoch said newspapers can still count on circulation gains "if papers provide readers with news they can trust." He added they will also need to embrace technology advances like RSS feeds and targeted e-mails. The challenge, according to Murdoch, will be to "use a newspaper's brand while allowing readers to personalize the news for themselves-and then deliver it in the ways that they want."

"The newspaper, or a very close electronic cousin, will always be around. It may not be thrown on your front doorstep the way it is today. But the thud it makes as it lands will continue to echo around society and the world," he said.

Charles is an executive editor with CNET News. He has covered technology and business for more than 25 years. A graduate of Queens College and Columbia University, Cooper began his career in journalism at the Associated Press before moving to technology coverage. Before joining CNET News, he worked at Computer & Software News, Computer Shopper, PC Week, and ZDNet. He received the Excellence in Journalism award from the Northern California branch of the Society for Professional Journalists for column writing. In addition to his blogging and podcast appearances, he is a co-host of the CNET News Daily Debrief. E-mail Charlie.

Sphere: Related Content

4 comments:

Marcus H said...

I guess I'd happily buy into this blog/argument if this light of truth and mistrust is also shown as strongly on Murdoch's kiddies as well: Fox News. For years, not only has it been blatantly obvious to most everyone with a brain that they are more than a little biased themselves, but the last 8 years have shown them to be little more than a propoganda machine for the Right.

Myself, I've noticed the same arguments about the Internet postings and blogs. To think there's any semblance of truly 'fair and unbiased' coverage of anything is a joke. No matter who you are, you are going to see things through the perceptive filters of your thoughts, feelings, and reactions. What sickens and annoys me, someone else viewing the same scene wouldn't even think twice about. Same event, two completely different points of view.

Now, I do concur wholly that the media itself is to blame with a good deal of this schism in America now, based on the facts not making it out, or being rather horribly distorted, on both sides of the argument. But turning your back on them entirely now that they've been caught with their hands in the cookie jar, and making their changes is just foolhardy as always. You should always check the data they present, look for backup information and facts. Never take anything anyone says at face value, because EVERYONE has an agenda: it's called their goals, hopes, aspirations and dreams. I'm just pleased that now that the Internet generation is here, we can finally start seeing more of that type of behavior, rather than trusting any talking head anywhere.

The Historian said...

Marcus-

You are correct relative to filters and agendas and we agree as to being skeptical and seeking out one's own resources.

However, network news and the large major metro newspapers have been posing as news resources when in fact they have been manipulating stories and resource materials to fit their agenda behind the scenes and, as we know, have been caught red handed on occasion. In other words they have knowingly tried to mislead and misinform the public.

Outlets like Fox news are most certainly biased right but they have yet to be caught purposefully misinforming their viewers.

The distinction between the two is of notable importance. That is honesty vs dishonesty. That is the difference that defines the reason why the big biased media has died a very hard death.

Ken said...

Fox News is biased right? Perhaps when you compare its airings to the rest of the MSM. Fox News, like the rest, is a business first. They are appealing to a market (Republican/Independent)that has no other TV/media alternative. That is good business for FNC. As long as the MSM acts as the propaganda wing of the DNC, you will see FNC try to provide some alternative balance. IMHO, were the MSM outlets to provide more balanced coverage, you would see the same for FNC.

The Historian said...

Ken-

You are right on. But do remember that the key distinction between Fox and the big biased media is that Fox does not intentionally lie to the public.