| Civil Liberties |
| "The First Amendment requires a certain minimal toughness of citizens. It is understandable that speech would be 'chilled' if people felt they risked arrest every time they opened their mouths. However, when people claim they have been 'chilled' by the speech of others, simply because it conflicts with their views or casts them in a bad light, they are only saying they are cowards and would like to live in a world where everyone agrees with them." — Greg C. Lukianoff |
|
The Growing Power of the Web
Janet Reno and Torture Miranda Free Press Smithsonian Hiroshima Exhibit Rodney King O.J. Simpson Jesse Jackson Richard Lamm 2000 Presidential Election Richard Nixon Dwight Eisenhower John F. Kennedy Vietnam Weekend Furloughs Iraq War John Kerry |
It's fairly common to see people or organizations making accusations of "media bias." Conservatives claim the media have a liberal bias; liberals or leftists claim it has a conservative bias (recall supporters of Bill Clinton claiming a "right-wing conspiracy", for example).
One can argue either way, depending on which issues you pick. Consider the following issues, which are highly controversial, and which the media frequently cover: abortion, affirmative action, defense spending vs. social spending, global warming, gun control, hate speech, the international criminal court, missile defense, the value of the United Nations. It's pretty easy to pick the liberal Democratic position and the conservative Republican position on each. I assert most television networks and newspapers will usually take the liberal position on these issues. (Talk radio is another story – it's apparently VERY conservative.) But the situation is a bit more complicated (and, I contend, much worse). You can find issues where the media appear to be conservative. Consider the ideas of restricting trade with low-wage nations, or dramatically increasing the minimum wage. One could assert that both these positions are liberal or leftist. Both are positions that the Democratics historically would have taken. One could argue that the fact the Democrats no longer support these positions indicates they have lost their way, or have abandoned their constituency, or are trying to become just another Republican party. |
|
In any case, because both parties agree on these issues (they think trade with low-wage countries is just fine, and the minimum wage should either stay where it is, or be increased by only a token amount), the media do not cover them. A bias, liberal or conservative, while not good, at least ensures the media cover certain issues — people can read or hear about them, think about them, and agree or disagree. The situation today is that the media completely ignore many critical issues, so the public isn't even aware of them.
An oil import tax could reduce the risk of war, improve energy conservation, and reduce global warming. The media never mention it. An open-door immigration policy lowers wages and contributes to poverty and overpopulation. Occasionally the media will report the rantings of someone who opposes immigration on racial grounds, but do you see any reasoned reporting of this issue? Speaking of overpopulation, when was the last time you saw much about it in the media? The ill effects of the War on Drugs are seldom reported. From time to time, there is media coverage of Japan as a victim of U.S. atom bombing, but where is the coverage of Japan's slaughter of millions of civilians during World War II? And while the media sometime recall the Nazi killings of Jews, they seldom mention Stalin's or Mao Tse-Tung's atrocities. The media are indeed biased — sometimes to the left, sometimes to the right, but always to whatever's trendy. They are more interested in covering the sex lives of celebrities than in any of the issues I mentioned in the previous paragraph. As far as the major media outlets are concerned, we don't really have a free press. Above are links to descriptions of media bias or sloppy reporting in a number of stories. |
| Top | Civil Liberties |