Need another example of media bias?
First, credit goes to Newsweek's Evan Thomas, who, once again, acknowledged media bias. "Let's talk a little media bias here," Thomas said, "The media, I think, want Kerry to win. And I think they're going to portray Kerry and Edwards -- I'm talking about the establishment media, not Fox -- but they're going to portray Kerry and Edwards as being young and dynamic and optimistic and all, there's going to be this glow about them that . . . collectively, the two of them, that's going to be worth maybe 15 points." Attorneys call things like this "admissions."
Earlier in Bush's term, Thomas also acknowledged the media's "pro-environment" bias: "Certainly the press is pretty green . . . pretty pro-environment. And I don't think there's any question that they, as a body, feel that Bush is wrong on the environment, with varying degrees of willingness to give him credit. And I'm excluding the conservative press. . . . But generally, the rank-and-file press is pretty green, and they're gonna use the Europeans to take the Bush's to task."
Consider the way the media treats the missing paper scandal involving former national security advisor Sandy Berger. In preparing for his appearance before the 9/11 commission, Berger, at former President Clinton's request, spent three days at the National Archives. Investigators now think Berger illegally took papers from the archives. But Berger calls his removal of the documents an "honest mistake." A key advisor to presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry, Berger promptly resigned from Kerry's campaign. The day the story broke, The New York Times online placed it on page 17. On television, CBS's Dan Rather cautioned viewers that the story "was triggered by a carefully orchestrated leak about Berger, and the timing of it appears to be no coincidence."
Now examine how the media -- on its own -- lowered Berger's stature in the Kerry campaign.
Way back in May 2004, The Washington Post called Berger "a top Kerry advisor." After the scandal, the Post busted him down to "informal advisor." Similarly, the Los Angeles Times in May called Berger a "Kerry foreign policy advisor." It now tags him as an "unpaid consultant." The Boston Globe in May called Berger a "top advisor." Now the paper relegates him to "informal advisor."
Still in denial about media bias?