Tag: media bias
Chuck Todd

Chuck Todd And The Myth Of Liberal Media Bias

Reprinted with permission from Press Run

Surveying the media landscape and seeing a Beltway press corps that's constantly on the run from Republican attacks, Meet The Press moderator Chuck Todd this week urged his colleagues to stand up to the right-wing bullies, who have spent decades demonizing journalists.

"We should have fought back better in the mainstream media. We shouldn't [have] accepted the premise that there was liberal bias. We should have defended," Todd told The Verge. "We ended up in this both-sides trope. We bought into the idea that, 'Oh my God, we're perceived as having a liberal bias.'"

He added: "Where we did get lost in this, and this sort of happened to mainstream media in particular, is that we did let Republican critics get in our heads, right? The Republicans have been running on, "There's a liberal bias in the media." This has been a 45-year campaign."

Technically, it's been a 52-year campaign, with Vice President Spiro Agnew's "nattering nabobs of negativism" attack on the press in 1969 often cited as the launching point of the choreographed crusade.

The good news is that every 12 or 24 months Todd emerges and makes these types of welcomed, clear-eyed pronouncements about the press, calling out right-wing lies, and urging his colleagues to do better in fighting against dishonest GOP attacks.

The bad news is Todd then goes back to work at NBC and rarely follows his own advice. He makes no structural changes to the programs he oversees to make sure they don't fall prey to GOP tactics. It's easy to view his pronouncements as performative, directed at those who are concerned about journalism and about the state of our democracy in the face of a Republican Party that broke its pact with common sense and instead now worships at the altar of a Mar-a-Lago retiree.

Todd refuses to follow his own lead and produce consistently clear, aggressive journalism, while not fretting about potential GOP pushback.

A quick example.

During Trump's second impeachment trial, Todd introduced a Meet The Press segment in which voters from a toss-up district in Michigan were interviewed about the House proceedings. Touted as a way to take the temperature of everyday voters outside of the "Beltway," the sit-down with six voters from Kent County, Michigan, offered a chance to hear if heartland denizens "cared" about impeachment. Except there was a problem: Every voter interviewed was a Republican, and every voter interviewed opposed impeachment. ("I don't even care. It's just noise.")

This makes no sense. If you wanted anecdotal evidence of the nation's response to impeachment, you'd interview a wide cross-section of voters. Instead, Todd only talked to Republicans even though the Michigan district he focused on is evenly split among Democrats and Republicans. What would explain this type of illogical press behavior other than a fear of upsetting conservatives — of being tagged with the Liberal Media Bias charge?

Todd lamented to The Verge that the press has fallen into a "both sides trope," where journalists strain to place blame on Republicans and Democrats even when it should not be distributed that way. Yet earlier this year, after another deadly gun rampage in America, and after the Republican Party once again categorically refused to support any possible gun safety legislation, Todd went on Meet the Press and blamed Congress — Both Sides — for not doing anything to stop the deadly plague.

In response to my media critiques, PRESS RUN readers often ask, why? Why does the press behave the way it does? Why does it engage in Both Sides nonsense in an effort to water down irresponsible GOP behavior? Why does it view so many news cycles through the prism of Republican talking points? Without question, the overriding cultural reason is the fear of being hit with the Liberal Media Bias label.

I don't mean that's what's driving journalists on an hourly, granular level, or that before filing a story or going on the air they consciously think about GOP attacks. But it does remain the dominant ethos and it's been ingrained in newsrooms for decades. (Being the target of right-wing smear campaigns is no fun and it can damage journalism careers.) Consequently, the press spends an inordinate amount of time trying to prove it's not guilty of Liberal Media Bias.

That institutional fear helps explain the inexplicable, like why so many news organizations refused to call Trump a liar for four years, even as they documented his thousands of lies. That was a deliberate decision to turn away from the truth —and from accurate language — while covering the most dangerous president in American history. Afraid that calling Trump a "liar" in straight news reports would spark cries of Liberal Media Bias, the press capitulated. In the process, Trump used his avalanche of untruths to chip away at our democratic institutions.

Eric Alterman wrote an entire, must-read book in 2003 expertly debunking the bias myth, What Liberal Media? Conservatives "know mau-mauing the other side is just a good way to get their own ideas across–or perhaps prevent the other side from getting a fair hearing for theirs," he wrote. I made a similar effort with my book, Lapdogs: How the Press Rolled Over for Bush, where I focused on the media's failure during the run-up to the Iraq War: "To oppose the invasion vocally was to be outside the media mainstream and to invite scorn. Like some nervous Democratic members of Congress right before the war, mainstream media journalists seemed to scramble for political cover so as to not subject themselves to conservative catcalls."

Still, the Liberal Media Bias myth persists and remains a driving engine of the conservative movement. It's arguably more potent today because Trump made it a centerpiece of his political appeal to hate the press. It would be helpful if journalists like Chuck Todd actually took their own advice and combated the fiction head on.

15 Startling Election Takeaways

15 Startling Election Takeaways

Reprinted with permission from AlterNet

The American electorate in 2016 has some strange and surprising features, according to a new survey released Thursday by PPRI/The Atlantic, that explored why people did or didn’t vote.

It found most voters apathetic early on, with two-thirds not participating in the primaries, but then they became engaged in a passionate fight over what many working class whites saw as their last chance to preserve a country where they could prosper. Conversely, women and many in communities of color felt deeply threatened by Donald Trump and were left after the election feeling discouraged and fearful.

What follows are 15 takeaways from their research, starting with the stark reality that a small percentage of American in both parties nominated their presidential candidates, which most Americans were not pleased with.

1. A minority of Americans gave us November’s candidates. Voter turnout in the primaries was 37 percent, or about half of the presidential election’s 63 percent turnout. This was as true for Democrats and Republicans, PRRI found, saying, “There were no significant voting pattern differences between supporters of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.” Fewer people drive the nominations and then tens of millions of less-engaged voters begrudgingly weigh in.

2. Making voting harder does depress turnout. States with all voting by mail set records this fall. On the other hand, nearly a quarter of non-voters (23 percent) said getting to a polling place took too much time. One in five (21 percent) said they were not registered, so they could not make last-minute decision. One-in-ten, or 11 percent, said, why bother, it’s “rigged.” The most common reason for not voting, among 36 percent who didn’t bother, was disliking the candidates.

3. Trump’s voters were more loyal than Clinton’s. More Trump supporters who early on said they would vote for him ended up doing so, compared to Clinton. “Only about three-quarters (76%) of registered voters who reported that they were supporting or leaning towards Clinton in late September and early October reported actually casting a ballot for her,” PPRI found. “In contrast, 84% of those who reported they were supporting Trump ahead of the election said they voted for him.”

4. Many couples split, with women backing Hillary and men not. The pollsters were able to quantify the political differences along gender lines, finding about two-thirds of Clinton voters said their spouses voted like them. But among those who did not, 10 percent said their spouse voted for Trump or someone else, and another 10 percent of the women supporting Clinton said that their husbands didn’t vote for anyone for president.

5. Trump households were more united than Clinton households. Compared to homes where women were behind Clinton but their partners had doubts, pro-Trump households were more unified. “Nearly three-quarters (73%) of male Trump supporters said their wife or partner was also supporting the GOP nominee, and few said their spouses or partners voted for Clinton (4%) or another candidate (3%). Thirteen percent of male Trump supporters reported that their wife or partner did not vote.”

6. Voters more scared of Democrats than Republicans. More said Democratic policies were “a threat to the country” than Republican policies. “A majority (56%) of Republicans and 61% of Trump voters say that the policies of the Democratic Party constitute a dangerous threat to the country,” PRRI said. “About four in ten (38%) Republicans believe that Democratic policies are misguided but not dangerous. Conversely, a slim majority (51%) of Democrats and half (50%) of Clinton supporters believe that the GOP’s platform represents a threat the country.”

7. Election left more negative feelings than positive ones. After Election day, half the nation was worried (26 percent), disappointed (19 percent) and angry (5 percent), compared to those feeling satisfied (23 percent) or excited (19 percent) by the election’s results. Intriguingly, a lot of Democrats and Republicans don’t like their party. “One-quarter (26%) of Republicans and three in ten (30%) Democrats say the policies of their own party are misguided,” PRRI said.

8. Working class whites most excited with results. This isn’t a new analysis, but PRRI found an intriguing twist. The most pleased people in 2016 were the ones most disappointed with Mitt Romney’s loss to President Obama in 2012. “A majority of white working-class Americans say they feel satisfied (26%) or excited (26%) about Trump’s electoral victory. In contrast, fewer than four in ten white college-educated Americans say they feel satisfied (20%) or excited (17%). In 2012, only about one in three white working-class Americans reported feeling either excited (12%) or satisfied (23%) about Obama’s reelection. More than six in ten said they were disappointed (29%), worried (29%), or angry (4%).”

9. Not surprisedly, communities of color are disappointed. “Majorities of black and Hispanic Americans report generally negative feelings about the election outcome, expressing feelings of disappointment (33% and 33%, respectively), worry (19% and 25%, respectively) or anger (15% and 7%, respectively).”

10. Women feel much worse than men.This also is not surprising given Trump’s misogynist messaging. “A slim majority of men report feeling satisfied (28%) or excited (23%) about the prospect of a Trump presidency, while only about one-third of women share these feelings—18% are satisfied and 15% are excited,” PRRI found. “Roughly one-third (32%) of women say they are worried, 21% say they are disappointed, and eight percent are angry about the election outcome. Negative feelings among non-white women are even more pronounced; 35% of non-white women say they are disappointed, 26% say they are worried, and 12% say they are angry.”

11. Christian fundamentalists also very excited. Among religious groups, only this cohort of evangelicals are really pleased with this election. “Two-thirds of white evangelical Protestants report being excited (31%) or satisfied (36%) with the election result,” PRRI said. “Despite winning a majority of white Catholic and white mainline Protestant votes, fewer than half of each group feel positively about Trump’s win. Fewer than half of white Catholics report feeling excited (27%) or satisfied (20%) by Trump’s victory.”

12. Republicans saw last chance to save America. This apocalyptic view was held by a majority of Trump voters. “Six in ten (60%) Republicans and 66% of Trump voters believe the election represented the last opportunity to arrest America’s decline, while only 29% of Democrats and 22% of Clinton voters embrace this view,” the pollsters said. “More than two-thirds (68%) of Democrats and 76% of Clinton voters reject this idea. The views of political independents closely resemble those of the public overall.”

13. Working-class whites split on doomsday scenario. Not everybody who lacked a college degree thought America was facing a do-or-die moment, but many did. “Nearly half (49%) of white working-class Americans believe the election was the last chance to stop America’s decline, while about as many (50%) disagree,” PRRI said. “Fewer than three in ten (27%) white college-educated Americans believe the election was the last chance to stop America’s decline.”

14. Media bias was biggest problem seen by voters.That was seen as the biggest problem (33 percent) with the election, followed by the influence of wealthy Americans and corporations (24 percent), low-voter participation (16 percent), voter suppression (7 percent) and voter fraud  concerns (6 percent). Republicans said media bias was the biggest problem, while Democrats said it was the undue influence of big money.

15. America is still a very racist county. Half the public felt Trump’s anti-immigrant remarks helped him. “Nearly half (48%) of the public says Trump’s position on immigration and immigrants helped him during the 2016 election, while only 13% said it hurt him. Roughly one-third (32%) say it did not make a difference either way,” PRRI said. Those findings show how entrenched racist views, whether they are openly expressed or not.

A Deeply Divided County Dig In
The country is as divided as ever on partisan lines, the PRRI/The Atlantic survey affirms. Not surprisingly, Democrats do not expect the future to be much better, while Republicans believe the opposite—buying into Trump’s hype.

“A slim majority (51%) of Republicans say that the quality of life in their community will get better while only 16% of Democrats share this view. However, only 27% of Democrats say the quality of life in their local community is likely to decline while most (55%) say it will probably remain about the same.”

What’s especially striking about that last finding is that many Democrats do not believe that the incoming Trump administration will be able to impact the legal and political forces that shape their lives. That is remarkable, when Trump is appointing the most right-wing administration in decades and is poised to lock up the U.S. Supreme Court for social conservatives and pro-corporate forces for decades.

Steven Rosenfeld covers national political issues for AlterNet, including America’s democracy and voting rights, campaigns and elections, and many social justice issues. 

IMAGE: Supporters of U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump protest outside a campaign event for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton in Williamson, West Virginia, United States, May 2, 2016. REUTERS/Jim Young

Trump Warns Of ‘Rigged’ Polling Places — But Pence Respects ‘Will Of The People’

Trump Warns Of ‘Rigged’ Polling Places — But Pence Respects ‘Will Of The People’

By Emily Stephenson and Alana Wise

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump dug deeper in his efforts to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the U.S. election, saying on Twitter on Sunday that he believed the results were being “rigged” at many polling places.

His tweet came hours after his vice presidential running mate, Mike Pence, said Republicans would accept the outcome of the Nov. 8 contest between Trump and his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton.

“The election is absolutely being rigged by the dishonest and distorted media pushing Crooked Hillary – but also at many polling places – SAD,” Trump wrote on Twitter, in the latest of a series of comments he has made over the past several days calling into question the fairness of the election.

Trump, who is trailing Clinton in opinion polls, did not provide any evidence to back his allegations of impropriety at the voting booth. Early voting and voting by mail have begun in many states.

In another tweet later on Sunday, Trump blamed “animals representing Hillary Clinton” and Democrats in North Carolina for an overnight attack on a local Republican Party headquarters in that state.

Local authorities said the building in Hillsborough, North Carolina, had been struck through a front window with flammable material and an adjacent building wall was spray-painted with a swastika and the words “Nazi Republicans leave town or else.”

“Animals representing Hillary Clinton and Dems in North Carolina just firebombed our office in Orange County because we are winning,” Trump tweeted.

Clinton denounced the attack as “horrific and unacceptable” in her own tweet, adding: “Very grateful that everyone is safe.”

Trump, a New York businessman, who has never held elective office, has often said the electoral process is skewed against him, including during the Republican nominating contests, when he disputed the method for winning delegates to the Republican National Convention.

His latest complaint of media bias stems from allegations by women that he groped them or made other unwanted sexual advances, after a 2005 video became public in which Trump was recorded bragging about such behavior. He apologized for the video but has denied each of the accusations.

“Election is being rigged by the media, in a coordinated effort with the Clinton campaign, by putting stories that never happened into news!” Trump tweeted on Sunday, a sentiment he also expressed in posts and during rallies in Maine and New Hampshire on Saturday. The comments raised questions both from Republicans and Democrats about whether he would accept the outcome should he lose to Clinton.

Trump said after the first presidential debate in September that he would “absolutely” accept the election outcome. But a few days afterward, he told the New York Times: “We’re going to see what happens.”

He has also urged his supporters to keep an eye on voting locations to prevent a “stolen” election, which some critics interpreted as encouraging them to intimidate voters.

Pence said on Sunday he and Trump would respect the will of the voters.

“We’ll respect the outcome of this election,” said Pence, the Indiana governor. “Donald Trump said in the first debate that we’ll respect the will of the American people in this election. The peaceful transfer of power is a hallmark of American history.”

In a weekend statement quoted by media, a spokeswoman for House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan, the top U.S. elected Republican, said: “Our democracy relies on confidence in election results, and the speaker is fully confident the states will carry out this election with integrity.”

On Sunday, Pence for the second time in recent weeks broke from Trump on Russia, this time on that country’s possible involvement in email hacks tied to the U.S. election, saying Moscow should face “severe consequences” if it has compromised U.S. email security.

“I think there’s no question that the evidence continues to point in that direction,” Pence said. “There should be severe consequences to Russia or any sovereign nation that is compromising the privacy or the security of the United States of America,” Pence said on “Fox News Sunday.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin said last week his country was not involved in trying to influence the U.S. election.

Trump, who has been criticized for appearing too close to Russia after he publicly praised Putin’s governing style, has questioned the reports of Moscow’s involvement. “Maybe there is no hacking,” he said during last week’s second debate with Clinton.

Trump also contradicted Pence on Russia during that debate. Pence had said the United States should use military force in Syria if Russia continued air strikes to prop up President Bashar al-Assad, but Trump said he disagreed.

The third and final debate between Trump and Clinton will be on Wednesday in Las Vegas.

(Reporting by Emily Stephenson and Alana Wise; Editing by Bill Trott and Peter Cooney)

Don’t Blame Liberal Media For Giuliani Gaffe

Don’t Blame Liberal Media For Giuliani Gaffe

By Jonathan Bernstein, Bloomberg News (TNS)

We’ve had a terrific demonstration over the last week or so of why the belief in liberal media bias is so strong.

It isn’t because of actual liberal media bias. Academic research finds plenty of ways the press gets things wrong, but an ideological slant isn’t one of them.

Most bias has to do with the industry’s norms (stories involving the president get more play than articles about governors, and so on). In some cases, the self-interest of the media plays a role, whether it’s promoting freedom of the press, for example, or building up anyone who might take on Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination as a way to build interest in that snooze fest.

What sustains the belief in liberal bias? It’s the go-to explanation among conservatives for almost everything that happens, and has been for at least four decades. Repeat something long enough, without strong opposition, and people will accept it.

So the reaction to the Rudy Giuliani story, in which the former New York mayor claimed Barack Obama didn’t “love” America, invoked howls of media bias from conservatives. Some said it wasn’t a story at all — Giuliani hasn’t been in office for years, so who cares what he says? Isn’t there real news out there? Others were upset that Republican candidates were pressed to agree or disagree with Giuliani — look, the liberal media is trying to make conservative politicians look stupid!

But we had an almost perfect parallel in the coverage of Howard Dean’s complaint that Republican Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin shouldn’t be president because he didn’t graduate from college.

Giuliani left office in 2001, ran for president in 2008, has since been out of active politics but shows up on TV all the time. Dean left office a year after Giuliani did, ran for president in 2004, was Democratic National Committee chairman through 2008, has since been out of active politics but shows up on TV all the time.

Republicans were forced to take a stand on whether Obama loves America; Democrats were pressed to say if they thought a college dropout was unqualified to be president.

The Giuliani story was bigger only because attacking the president is a bigger deal than attacking one of many Republican presidential candidates, and New York (where much of the national media is based) trumps Vermont.

Both accusations were pretty much denounced by everyone; both sparked predictable partisan bashing and a few interesting reflections.

But liberals didn’t go crying about conservative media bias in the Dean-Walker case because they don’t see every news story as an example of prejudice against them. Conservatives do.

For example, they screamed that the media ignored the scandal ending the career of Democratic Governor John Kitzhaber of Oregon, but as Philip Bump explained, this too was caused by ordinary press norms, not ideological bias. Kitzhaber’s scandals were undercovered (at least in the national media) compared with those of Republican Chris Christie because Christie is running for president and he’s a governor in the New York area. Think about it. The press hardly ignored scandals costing Democratic Governors Rod Blagojevich or Eliot Spitzer their jobs. It’s just that Democrats never interpreted those firestorms as examples of Republican media bias.

There’s nothing wrong with pointing out when news coverage is wrong or wrong-headed. But ideology isn’t at the root of those mistakes and biases.

Jonathan Bernstein is a columnist for Bloomberg View. Readers may email him at jbernstein62@bloomberg.net.

Photo: Gage Skidmore via Flickr