Brian said he thought print journalists were more likely to be non-biased than broadcasters. While that might have been true in the college ranks, I have always thought the opposite. Print folks can publish just about anything they want. I have never seen a tv newscaster endorse a candidate, but has been common for newspapers for a long time.
Newspapers typically have a slant, either liberal or conservative and that is usually known by it's readers. Since broadcasters are using the public airwaves they are supposed to be non-biased.
The interwebnet however opens up a whole new playing ground. I am guessing the print rules will be followed and should be assumed by readers.
Heres a blog that has more on endorsements:
http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=101&aid=135278
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Ok well let me clarify: I consider print journalists to be far more objective with their hard-news reporting than broadcast.
Editorial content belongs in print journalism...too many people still think the Fairness Doctrine is still in existence. When I say I think broadcast journalists are more biased...I'm keenly aware of the influence of ownership over producers. When the day's rundown is being put together it's the producer's job to choose what stories make the limited airtime...a story that makes management happy is far more likely to make it in the a or b block.
In print I think this is less of an issue because the editorial board has their outlet. It becomes much less important to control hard-news content when they have two-three pages dedicated to opinion. The board also acts as a moderate between publishers and journalists.
Post a Comment