Liberal Media Ethicists Mourn MSNBC Blurring the News/Opinion Line

Photo of Tim Graham.

In Tuesday's Los Angeles Times, on the verge of MSNBC's latest presidential debate, media reporter Matea Gold explored MSNBC's funky brew of news and (mostly) left-wing hectoring. Gold found some liberal media experts said that blend "gives partisans fodder to argue bias." Can anyone locate the line dividing news from editorializing?

"In an environment where opinions are flying, words escape easily," said Mark Jurkowitz, associate director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, a nonpartisan research group. "It gets harder and harder to define the line of what's acceptable."

Tom Fiedler, the visiting Murrow lecturer at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government, rejected the idea "that you can move from one side to the other and not confuse most viewers. I don't think even Fox would attempt to take Bill O'Reilly and put him in a position of being seen as a news anchor."

Both experts had regular media jobs at one point. Jurkowitz was a media reporter for the Boston Globe (and the alternative liberal rag the Boston Phoenix). Fiedler was a longtime political reporter and editor at the Miami Herald.

MSNBC executive Phil Griffin pooh-poohed the charge. He acknowledged that MSNBC's "unrestrained culture" disturbs some NBC News veterans who appear on the cable channel, but claimed "people feel more comfortable with the crossover" than ever before.

Brian Williams -- man, is that guy funny! -- played Mr. Objective as Gold explained "he does not have qualms about giving reports on the opinion-saturated network," but they must work with his rigid objectivity:

"They know my limits; I don't do opinions," said the anchor. "But that doesn't mean that a skilled broadcaster or journalist can't inhabit both worlds at the same time."

"I don't do opinions." He should have used that one on SNL! Hilarious. (MRC's Brian Williams Profile in  Bias is here.)

That sounds like last week's Time magazine "10 Questions" interview with Tim Russert, where he tried the same routine, about how he's always persistently objective and adversarial with guests:

Do you have strong political views, or have you found the ability to rise above it all? -- Carole Ramsay, Morris Plains, N.J.

Lawrence Spivak, who founded Meet the Press, told me before he died that the job of the host is to learn as much as you can about your guest's positions and take the other side. And to do that in a persistent and civil way. And that's what I try to do every Sunday. My views are not important.

Well, not every Sunday. Bill Clinton didn't exactly find Russert persistently taking the other side in '06. He wasn't an interviewer that day. He was acting as a statesman's facilitator.

 

—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

So, is she complaining that

"Gold found some liberal media experts said that blend 'gives partisans fodder to argue bias.'"

So, is she revealing that MSNBC is biased or just complaining that they're blowing the media's cover?

Notice that in both cases

Notice that in both cases where a democrat felt they were being unfairly treated, the media publicly apolgized. You'll see no such thing about a Republican.

Its so funny to see these democrats whine about bias now and suddenly the media pays attention to it.

Just another case of, "Its completely different when democrats do it!".

Notice, too, that she never

Notice, too, that she doesn't address whether there is a possibility that MSNBC might be biased, only that perhaps they are doing things that conservatives might argue are examples of bias. It's absolute torture to get a media type to admit that a duck is a duck.

BIAS...

I think Bernie Goldberg is on to something when he says many of those in the MSM don't even realize their liberal bias because most of them have almost no contact with conservatives or conservative thought. They are products of their environmental bubble, which is all liberal, all the time.

 

"Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise"  Mark Levin

Oh, I'm certain he's

Oh, I'm certain he's correct. It's just that when confronted with the obvious, they still can't bring themselves to admit it, seeking any lamebrained excuse or alternate explanation.

Right, it's sort of "We know

Right, it's sort of "We know you're (MSNBC) not biased, but don't give conservatives ammunition to say you are." (In other words, don't be obvious about it!)

Uh-Oh

She may have gotten herself a place on Olby's worst person list.  It only takes one teeny criticism of the left.

Why the liberal complaints now

This is the 3rd time that whiners have complained about certain liberals going bonkers for liberalism on air. That is fascinating as the Olberman type was just fine with them when Walter Cronkite was savaging Richard Nixon with his pocket mouse, Dan Rather.

The media has always had this bias in the New York Times being Pravda, Tom Brokaw being Tomero Brokawski of Tass and the various opinionating Randall Pinkstons having Bush 41 dying because he puked on the Jap PM.

Perhaps it is the Kurtz types not liking Hillary being cut off at the knees by that "black man" which MSNBC helped herd those Kos liberals into voting.........or perhaps it is Kos is where Olberman turned to when he had not kissed the ring enough of the MSM to get invited to pant a few paragraphs for the old grey tart.

It is tough being a liberal now. One just can not tart it up and get away with it........if one pimps their Chelsea and it get's exposed.....the bard gets basted........but if one whores themselves to George Soros in hedge funds one gets Obamania praise.

 

*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS

Bias?

"Liberal" bias in the media??? A fantasy. I don't know what they are talking about. Right wing conspiracy. Now that's a more realistic subject. Bring on the "experts"!

NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"

The liberal media has

The liberal media has "ethicists"??????

 

Since I assume these people are not stupid

I can only assume that it is a concerted effort to confuse the idiotic masses with commentary masquerading as news and to desensitize those who understand what it is.

The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.

An allegory of media bias

Recall if, you can, the suave Southern colonel of a century ago who had a complete set of explanations for why it was appropriate and reasonable for the “colored folk” to live in a relatively subordinate manner. It was not as if he were racist or prejudiced, it was just that that was the way things ought to be. If some damnyankee, were to make an issue about it in an unrelenting manner, the colonel might be forced to admit that one could, if he insisted, view the Southerner’s “peculiar” predilections as prejudiced, or even racist, but that was only because the damnyankee was thoroughly prejudiced in the first place.

This provides for me an allegory for understanding the bias of the MSM. Living in their own self-made environment they seem to be bereft of any objective measure of how biased they are. Anyone from the outside who takes issue can jolly well go ….

Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.