Why are most newspaper reporters and editors liberal? I've been working in the business for more than 20 years, and I can't give a quick, definitive answer to the question. But I do think a contributing factor is that editors, like other managers, tend to hire and reward staffers who think as they do. They see their positions as neutral, which is human nature — and is reinforced by the fact that the folks in the desks around them vote the same way they do.
When they read about complaints of media bias, editors write the criticism off because they see reporters every day trying to cover stories fairly and succeeding. They fail to notice that their shared ideology limits what they see as stories.
Which is why, I believe, that Fox News Channel ratings are so high. As the New York Times reported, CNN reached 271,000 viewers aged 25 to 54 in prime time in April, less than half of Fox News' 668,000. In the first quarter of 2009, Fox News beat CNN and MSNBC combined in the Nielsen ratings.
Liberals mock the news network's "fair and balanced" slogan. But if you read your average newspaper, then tune into Fox News or listen to conservative talk radio, it evens out. People hungry for a conservative outlook in print aren't going to find it in the news or features pages. Liberal newspapers helped build conservative media.
I should note that there's a world of difference between Fox during the day and Fox after dark. Primetime programs feature conservative hosts trading on their opinions, while Fox daytime features straight reportage.
The network's full-tilt promotion of the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) party protests on April 15, alas, undercut the whole network's credibility as reporters covered events at which Fox News biggies like Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck were star speakers. Not fair. Not balanced.
CNN execs have responded to the success of Fox News by noting that their own audience numbers and profits are up.
They also argue that their brand is purer because, as CNN president Jon Klein told the New York Times, "There are several networks that reside in the cable news category, but only one that reliably delivers the news unbiased."
Well, not quite. It turns out CNN has its own TEA Party baggage. Covering a protest in Chicago, veteran reporter Susan Roesgen lost her cool. She interviewed a man protesting high taxes and government debt with his 2-year-old and began to argue with him: "Do you realize that you're eligible for a $400 credit?" Roesgen asked him. And: "Did you know that the state of Lincoln gets $50 billion out of the stimulus (package pushed by President Obama)?" It was as if Roesgen thought she were White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.
Then she dismissed the event as "anti-government" and "anti-CNN" — and the product of the "right-wing conservative network, Fox."
Asked about Roesgen, CNN's response: "No comment." In this space I have lamented what seems to be the advent of Designer News, that allow consumers to cull out undesirable viewpoints and information.
The irony here is that newspapers have written fawning stories about Google and Twitter and free classified ad sites as if they are all good. But when newspapers cover Fox News, they have this need to write the network off as right-wing — end of story. Nothing to learn there, right?
Clearly there is an insatiable appetite for news from a conservative perspective that the folks who run newspapers continue to overlook — except in the opinion pages.
There are days I wonder if newspaper and network news execs cannot change by broadening their ideological diversity — even to save themselves. They'll keep telling themselves that they are unbiased — up until the end.
E-mail Debra J. Saunders at dsaunders@sfchronicle.com. To find out more about Debra J. Saunders, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

|
 |
Comments
|
9 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
How is FOX, somehow not 'fair', because they promoted events that THEIR HOSTS were going to be attending? Isn't that what ANYBODY would do? And instead of challenging FOXs' promoting the TEA Parties, the REAL STORY, is the RIDICULE and DISPARAGEMENT of these AMERICANS, from the other Networks.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Timothy L. Pennell
Tue May 5, 2009 4:14 AM
|
|
|
|
Why is Sean Hannity considered a "Fox" host? His radio show (which got his career going) is broadcast by (I believe) ABC radio; why is he not considered an "ABC" host?
Of course, it is the TV exposure that is most visible (although Rush Limbaugh does pretty good without it). So this is really a nit.
But regarding Susan Roesgens, I would have fired her for what she did. She should have at least been suspended for 30-60 days. From a reporter's viewpoint, there was no justification for what she did that day.
And Anderson Cooper's remark about "teabagging" was enough for me to change the name of his show from "Anderson Cooper 360" to "Anderson Cooper 69".
Comment: #2
Posted by: Nick_in_Virginia
Tue May 5, 2009 6:01 AM
|
|
|
|
Sorry for the formatting in my previous post, but when I did the "Preview" it showed up in 4 paragraphs, as I had typed it. After the "Post", it is all one big, long paragraph. Maybe someone can have the web administrators check this out?
Comment: #3
Posted by: Nick_in_Virginia
Tue May 5, 2009 6:03 AM
|
|
|
|
RIP NYT, none too soon.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Juanito Verde
Tue May 5, 2009 7:14 AM
|
|
|
|
Ma'am; Why do so many conservatives follow up a false predicate with so much garbage for reasoning and think they have done anything of merit??? The fact that anyone is a liberal is a good sign, because well educated people who are not living on injustice are usually liberal...Where is the patriot in this most liberal of countries who is not liberal??? Conservatism in this land is liberal, if it is not revolutionary...No matter how far the hands of time advance, there will always be those who want to shackle his wrists to his ankles, and make him take it all back... Some want us living in the time of tyrants, and some want us in the time of kings and all call themselves conservative, and howl at anyone seeking liberty as a liberal... The fact is, that what the people were promised to get their acceptance of the constitution was as revolutionary in that day as in our own...How dare the government seek justice, or liberty, or union, or general welfare...The reactionaries would like to send us all to hell for asking government to fulfill its promises two hundred years late...It will not keep its promises, and it will fail, and the liberals will get the blame because they already have, and they always will -from the dimwits and dum heads on the right... But I will say it again... This is a liberal constituion we have judging by its goals... And it is a patriotic people who stand by the liberal goals of the constitution and challenge the government to live up to its goals... The reactionaries know nothing, and learn nothing... They will always be there, living in their myths, and cursing humanity for wanting what is right...Left to themselves they would always be deciding who to eat... Which is to say, if conservatism had ever been warranted, we would all consider cannibalism the highest form of human development...Like it or not; change is essential to life...While humanity is forever resisting change; it often become necessary in the course of human affairs...Thanks...Sweeney
Comment: #5
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Tue May 5, 2009 8:38 PM
|
|
|
|
Fantasy sells better than the truth, Saunders. Always has.
Comment: #6
Posted by: Masako
Wed May 6, 2009 8:03 AM
|
|
|
|
I wish that Saunders had mentioned that Roesgens' temper tantrum didn't even address the fact that all those "tax credits" and "stimulus packages" are money that is either borrowed from future generations or stolen from taxpayers. Maybe the TEA protestor isn't concerned about just getting all that he can from the government teat; maybe he's concerned that A) government is going economic revival in a completely wrongheaded way, B) that taxes are simply too high, period and C) that there are bigger concerns in life than simply grabbing all the money you can. But Roesgen is a diehard lefty and doesn't understand such things, does she? Her attitude is typical of the liberal mentality that dominates newsrooms; and worse, sometimes the media's mask slips off and they revert to what they really are - shills for the Democrats. No wonder Americans are tuning out in droves and tuning in to the most viable alternative.
Comment: #7
Posted by: Matt
Thu May 7, 2009 1:04 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: James A, Sweeney. I wish you'd learn to express yourself coherently instead of just babbling on and on pointlessly like this. And why do I always see your wretched comments under EVERY political columnist on this site?
Comment: #8
Posted by: Matt
Thu May 7, 2009 1:05 AM
|
|
|
|
News organizations are businesses attempting to make money for shareholders, and are governed by supply and demand. They are owned by conservative, hard nosed business people intent on making a profit. They hire liberal reporters because the stories they file bring in more advertising dollars, because more people identify with the liberal point of view. Conservatives are in the minority and don't seem to understand their position. Our country was founded by liberals. In 1776 conservatives were called loyalists.
Comment: #9
Posted by: Jerry Kircus
Thu May 7, 2009 6:55 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|