By Staff

If you are not among those who mock Fox News’ slogan of being “fair and balanced,” then more than likely you subscribe to the belief that the “liberal media” is constantly distorting the truth in an attempt to indoctrinate the masses. When did the idea of an unbiased press disappear and why is every story, every word disseminated to the public, considered an attack from one side against the other?

In these past two weeks, The Chronicle has come under scrutiny in two separate instances from both sides of the political spectrum. A “letter to the editor” in the Nov. 9 issue by a known member of the College Republicans, a conservative student group on campus, criticized the paper of demonstrating a liberal slant by running an article about Democratic Congressional candidate David Mejias. The letter suggested that The Chronicle purposely excluded coverage of Peter King, the incumbent Republican running against Mejias for re-election. This week, The Chronicle was charged with “recycling inaccurate claims” that a professor at the University is a “left-wing threat” in an article that appeared in the Nov. 9 issue. This letter chastises The Chronicle for citing David Horowitz, an outspoken ultraconservative, as a source in the article. If one week a newspaper can be accused of harboring a liberal bias, and then a week later it is allegedly disseminating conservative views, what does this say about the press, and more importantly what does this reveal about its readers?

Watchdog groups, mass media scholars and research institutes have all attempted to get a handle on these claims of political biases in the media. From the United Kingdom to the University of Oklahoma, this issue has been poked at from virtually every possible angle. They have studied the effects of advertising, reporters’ personal biases, media ownership, reader demographics and the political climate, and yet no decisive conclusion was reached. In fact, the researchers then had to examine the role that their own biases may play in defining what language should be considered biased and how the data is interpreted. They referred to this problem as “experimenter bias.”

One conclusion that was presented by two researchers at Harvard University did not prove or disprove the presence of a liberal or conservative slant in the media, but rather focused on a group often overlooked in discussions on this matter – the readers. Sendhil Mullainathan and Andrei Shleifer’s behavioral model, which was published in the American Economic Review, stated that when readers and viewers take in information, they are bringing their own biases to the table. They said that news consumers actually seek out, whether consciously or not, stories and publications that confirm their preconceived beliefs. Conversely, stories that do not reflect what the reader wants to hear could then be considered biased or slanted to the other direction. Therefore, if publications want to maximize profits, then common sense would tell them to pander to what the public wants – and sadly what most desire is not an independent, unbiased press.

The debate also extends into the academic community, particularly college campuses. This week, The Chronicle of Higher Education reported that the Pennsylvania state legislature began investigating claims that liberal college professors were treating conservative students unfairly and thus, infringing on their academic freedoms.

The report also quotes David Horowitz, who testified before the panel that more than 100 students told him that their professors had “rallied against George Bush, the war in Iraq and the policies and attitudes of Republicans and conservatives.” Horowitz and others are calling for an “academic bill of rights,” for students to assure that students who are opposed to the ideologies of their professors will be ensured a voice in political discussions and be protected from discrimination in the classrooms.

The Pennsylvania committee has said that enforcing such policies are “unnecessary” because cases of discrimination based on political views is extremely rare in schools. At Hofstra, some students have expressed, via the online discussion forum Ratemyprofessor.com, that some professors at the University do demonstrate a liberal slant during their lectures. One student commented that a University history professor “wants to indoctrinate” her students and warns prospective students “keep any kind of conservative views to yourself and you’ll do great.” Another student described a past professor as being “liberal…like 95 percent of professors here.” There was also a claim by one student that a professor in the political science department imparts a “basic theme…that Republicans/Conservatives are evil, while Democrats/Liberals are to be worshipped.”

Perhaps, the problem that is plaguing college classrooms and news outlets is that in both cases, the audience expects more than what human beings are capable of doing. They expect the information to be unequivocally true, when it is impossible to be absolutely certain of most of the subjects being presented. Secondly, they want the information to be completely devoid of biases. However, it is impossible for human beings to turn off their minds and emotions completely. Of course, they are going to have an opinion. The more reasonable approach, however, would be to not deny that these biases exist, but instead be upfront about them, identify them as statements of opinion and then focus on the facts.

Readers and listeners must also exercise this same approach in the manner they digest the news that is presented to them. They must recognize their own opinions, approach the material with an open mind and be aware of what is fact, what is opinion and where the lines are blurred. Applying a critical approach to any news that is presented does not mean criticizing the source, becoming defensive and dismissing it as propaganda for the opposing team. Rather it means being aware that there are always multiple sides, a variety of opinions and the potential for human error. Just because you do not agree with a statement does not deem it untrue, in fact, you will probably learn more from the stories that fluster, irritate and rattle everything you believe in.