The filter that keeps us shielded from news
Did you see James Campbell's column today? It took him fourteen or so paragraphs to explain why the Chronicle downplayed (actually, noplayed) Sen. Joe Lieberman's optimistic view of the progress being made in Iraq, while not hesitating to run a front page story on Rep. Jack Murtha's call for a troop pullout.
In contrast, it took Columbia Journalism Review editor Steve Lovelady two sentences to explain why the MSM didn't give Sen. Lieberman's stance the same attention it gave Rep. Murtha's:
You think the New York Times and Washington Post should write a story every time a neocon hawk pens an essay for the Wall Street Journal's editorial page?
Somehow, I don't see that happening...
For a more solid understanding of why the media is so seemingly out of touch with average folks, check out a poll Pew Research did recently:
Negative press coverage of the war in Iraq in recent weeks has emphasized rising pessimism among the American public about the conflict. But a new survey found that 56 percent of the public thinks that efforts to establish a stable democracy in the country will succeed.
[snip]
When asked whether they thought democracy would succeed in Iraq, only 33 percent of the journalists agreed that it had a chance. The number was even worse in academe -- 27 percent of respondents thought the effort would succeed. Among the military, however, the number stood at 64 percent.
"The media and academia have always been more to the left, so how they report these things is not necessarily the way the country sees things," said Charles Gravely, 56, a real estate executive from the District.
It explains quite a bit, of course.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 12/04/05 09:54 PM | Print | Comments (5)
Previous Entry | Home | Next Entry
ADVERTISING
DISCLAIMER
All content © 2004-09, blogHOUSTON and the respective authors.
blogHOUSTON.net is powered by Nucleus.
Site design and Nucleus customization are by Kevin Whited.