Bias doesn't have to be National, WFAA-TV In Dallas Proves This

Posted: Feb 19, 2009 12:02 PM
Matt briefly touched on the R. Allen Stanford bias in the media in his blog post, saying:
"Yesterday, for example, we learned that if you are a scandal-ridden CEO who happens to also be a Republican, partisan affiliation will become part of the story.

We also learned that if you are a crooked financier who has bilked his clients out of billions, your donations to Democrats is not, however, "newsworthy".
We all know that there is liberal bias at the national networks, but we tend to trust our local media not to have that same bias. However it's unfortunately there, just better hidden it seems.

Here in Dallas, WFAA-TV reported on Republicans deciding on whether or not to keep the money donated to them by Mr. Stanford. However, there was no mention at all of the Democrats receiving funds. Someone who doesn't pay a great deal of attention would automatically assume this is just a Republican Scandal. However, the numbers don't add up. When you look at Congressional Quarterly's list of donations, you find some pretty interesting facts:
- Of the $835,550 in donations made, a whopping 84% or $703,500 went to Democrats.

- Of the 60 individual donations...44 went to Democrats.
The question here is, why the bias reporting locally from a television station? As Matt points out, if a if you are a scandal-ridden CEO who happens to also be a Republican, partisan affiliation will become part of the story...but if your a Democrat, it's not "newsworthy." Sadly, this is the news media culture of today.

PS For all of you that will claim I am just trying to grasp at a straw, I think Chris Fields makes a good point - if the liberals can do, we can't?

UPDATE: Just received a phone call from David Schechter from WFAA and he was very polite and said that he wishes he had mentioned that an overwhelming majority of the total went to Democrats and that would have made it a better story. He did say the focus was on politicians and not Republicans, though, but a second look shows:
"Republican Rep. Pete Sessions of Dallas was one of Stanford's favorites; he has contributed more than $4,000 since 1989."
It's not to nit pick, just to highlight there was a reference that Mr. Schechter overlooked. It was a very graciouos call back and certainly unexpected, and it should be positively recognized.

However, that will not make the news and the perception will remain that this was a GOP scandal. I am hoping I am wrong, and we'll see another story on the overall problem on the left side of the aisle. We'll see...