Dismissing the notion as "simplistic" that her paper is liberally biased, Washington Post ombudsman Deborah Howell wrote on Sunday that there is "a grain of truth" to the lament from conservatives that the Post skews leftward (emphases mine):
Neither the hard-core right nor left will ever be satisfied by Post coverage -- and that's as it should be. But it's true that The Post, as well as much of the national news media, has written more stories and more favorable stories about Barack Obama than John McCain. Editors have their reasons for this, but conservatives are right that they often don't see their views reflected enough in the news pages.
Aside from bias, Howell confessed another journalist sin on behalf of the Post, arrogance (emphases mine):
Story Continues Below Ad ↓It is a disease easily caught by journalists, who can overlook its symptoms. We believe that we have a collective "nose for news" and the judgment to know best what readers need to know and how to present it. We believe in our own wisdom and experience and in the purity that keeps us out of politics and special-interest groups. We have our own rules, and we don't change them. We seldom ask for input from readers. We believe that if it weren't for us, the world couldn't be as well informed and democracy wouldn't operate as it should. But this sounds self-important to readers.
That arrogance can come into play in political coverage. While much Post coverage has been straightforward and some of it is excellent, the predominance of horse-race coverage has not satisfied what readers wanted to know about the candidates. Tactics, strategy and polls are important, but last week readers were still begging for coverage of where the candidates stood on the biggest issues.
They asked for such coverage beginning in the primary season. They didn't get much information from The Post. Reporters have even complained to me that suggestions for issues coverage have been turned aside.
Even for the "Potomac Primary" on Feb. 6 for voters in Maryland, the District and Virginia, readers only got one large graphic box on issues -- on voting day. Too little, too late.
But that arrogance and liberal bias are not separate symptoms, as indeed a lack of attention to the issues has played out in the media's lack of interest in the implications of Sen. Obama's tax plan or his pursuit of cap-and-trade policies that could "bankrupt" the coal industry.
Come to think of it, "too little, too late" may be an apt description of Howell's admission of the Post's biases.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Again. I will keep
November 4, 2008 - 14:46 ET by mattmAgain. I will keep repeating it: I predicted this. Just like in 1992, the media began to do their job, a bit - but only AFTER it was too late to possibly impact the election.
If they really mean it, they should admit they have discredited themselves as journalists and quit their jobs and go join Obama's Bronw-Shirted "civilian security corps."
Zeig Heil!
Deborah has admitted the
November 4, 2008 - 15:01 ET by dscottDeborah has admitted the WaPo's complicity before and what was the result? Nothing. NO corrective action. The WaPo still published more articles on Obama than McCain, still more positive ones for Obama than McCain. So what's changed? I made this comment before when her mea culpa was delivered some months back, your confession does not bring absolution for the past when you don't intend to correct your future behavior. The WaPo is not forgiven Deborah, the unethical unjournalistic conduct of the WaPo has not changed nor will it, thus your readership will continue to drop and your income with it. The WaPo is nothing more than a hired mouthpiece for the Dem Party. You will receive your reward in full.
Liberals practice in deceitfulness the game of "It's easier to ask forgiveness than it is to get permission" Rear Admiral Grace Hopper
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
Sounds to me like a
November 4, 2008 - 15:00 ET by katiejane"Gee don't hold our blatant bias against us - we're only insufferable arrogant idiots" Maybe it is finally sinking in that a large number of potential readers think their paper is good for little other than bird cage liners. Indeed it is too late - they've made their bed as far as I'm concerned.
I have emailed Deborah
November 4, 2008 - 15:40 ET by d1carterI have emailed Deborah Howell many times and she has always emailed back with an explanation. She carries no weight at the paper and I fear, soon (like after the election) she will not be needed in the eyes of the paper.
Amazing
November 4, 2008 - 16:06 ET by acumen....last week readers were still begging for coverage of where the candidates stood on the biggest issues.
WaPo readers having to beg the newspaper to print information? Say what?
I wonder if it ever occured to WaPo management and shareholders that readers "begging" for information from an organization created to make a profit by providing information to others is not a viable buisiness plan?
How long would Starbucks stay in buisiness selling empty cups while their customers were begging for coffee?
Classic example of idiots running the assylum. Yet I'm supposed to believe the WaPo is a credible organization to endorse our next President.
Does the LA Times have an ombudsman?
November 4, 2008 - 16:11 ET by LionKingStill waiting for the LA Times to release the Khalidi tape.
Again, if it is nothing, then why withhold it?
If it is relevant, then why censor it?
The real loser is the
November 4, 2008 - 16:19 ET by Ruths husband BenThe real loser is the American public. Many American's bought a pig in a poke today. They have no idea who they voted for. Just a man who appealed to them on an emotional level. Hope. Change. I believe most conservatives will be disallusioned by the a.m., and most liberals by this time next year.
America has been screwed, and royally so, by a media machine with way too much interest in one candidate to the exclusion of the truth.
What really amazes me is that newscasters actually think they have wisdom. As I said before, I have been intimately involved in several major news stories over the course of my lifetime and the one thing I know is that the reporter ALWAYS get the story wrong. I mean, these are bozo's with literature degrees, for goodness sakes! Not brain surgeons.....
These watered down mea
November 4, 2008 - 19:34 ET by Chris NormanThese weak, watered down mea culpas are worse than nothing. I resent people like her almost as much as as the biased staff and ownership. These "admissions" are just insults piled on top of the dishonesty and corruption.
McNotObama '08