The Virgin Vote: Was media coverage too liberal?

In a New York Times column, Douglas MacKinnon argues that the news media swung too far to the left in the coverage of the 2008 presidential campaign. MacKinnon, a self-described "independent conservative" and former press secretary to Senator Bob Dole, states that liberal ideas and issues are honored at the expense of the conservative right.

By rule, journalism is expected to be as unbiased and objective as possible while adhering to high standards of ethics and news gathering professionalism. Have we lost that integrity in an age where business leaks into the editorial environment and decisions are based on entertainment rather than serious news value? Are we slowly giving up our duty to the American public to ask the tough questions, keep the government accountable, and be a forum for the voiceless? The fact of a liberal news media seems to contradict journalistic ethics.

More importantly, are conservatives dangerously remaining silent at the expense of thoughtful debate? Today in my entrepreneurship class, we polled the class on Proposition 8 and the presidential nominees. The score was 20 for McCain and 24 for Obama. You would think that in liberal California, Obama would win by a landslide. But when liberals are crying to be heard, where are the conservative voices? Both liberal and conservative voices must join the discussion in order to uphold our deliberative democracy. One cannot dominate the other, as it appears to be doing now.

According to the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism, McCain has received far more negative coverage than Obama.

Is this fair? It seems to be a byproduct of the cynicism generated by the Bush administration's failed policies? Although both candidates have received nearly the same press attention, there is an undeniable tip in Obama's favor. This kind of media coverage opens debate on the role of journalism in this society. The media aligned themselves with Bush's administration and his campaign for terror after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The overwhelming imbalance in the Pew research suggests a backlash against this former no-questions-asked alliance.

There are some conservative voices, but not many rationally defend their standpoints without seeming like bigots. Has the conservative voice been overshadowed by liberal mainstream media? Perhaps. The blame goes both ways. Liberals label conservatives as right-wing fundamentalists, and conservatives label their opponents as free-for-all hippie tree huggers. The truth is, we need both extremes and all the diverse in-betweens to improve our country. And based upon the reader responses to MacKinnon's article, people are forgetting the validity of points made by conservative pundits.

One reader wrote, "There’s an alternative reality that conservatives can slip into and pity themselves. If anything the MSM has been so far to the right that when it moves toward objectivity conservatives react as if it is on the left."

The mainstream media has always been traditionally a little to the left because of the inherent skepticism needed in keeping politicans, corporations and government accountable. But this is an interesting point. Social perceptions of mainstream media changes with the swearing in of a new president. Conservatives

Another reader wrote, "The problem isn’t so much media bias — it’s the way the media had to overcompensate for the perception of bias."

So every time an unfair call is made, the opposing side cries to be heard? With each new president, his ideology is attacked more often than the opposite ideology. Or, is there really a change in media biases? My guess is that biases seesaw up and down depending on the social and economic climate of the nation.

Cast your ballot for the next president and vice president of the United States: