Media 'Liberalism' Under the Microscope

Reader R.K. "Dick" Fazzone of Potomac taunted me recently: "Deborah, every day, The Post continues to practice news journalism with a liberal political bias without comment from you, The Post's ombudsman." Okay, Dick, here I go into the lion's den.

During my first six months here, I heard more from liberal Democrats who complained that The Post was going easy on the Bush administration. In the past six months, it has shifted to Republicans claiming bias. Several readers also have mentioned remarks by former Post political reporter Tom Edsall, who in September said on a conservative talk show that most journalists he knew were liberal.

First, facts. The most recent survey (2004) from the Pew Center on People and the Press, reflecting the findings of earlier surveys, said that about 54 percent of national and 61 percent of local-level journalists described themselves as moderate. The percentage identifying themselves as liberal increased from a 1995 survey: 34 percent of national journalists and 23 percent of local ones described themselves that way, compared with 22 percent and 14 percent nine years ago. "As was the case a decade ago, journalists as a group are much less conservative [7 percent nationally, 12 percent locally] than the general public [33 percent]," the Pew Center report said.

My experience is consistent with the Pew study. Most of the reporters and editors I know well are more liberal on social issues than the general populace, and that's the leaning you can sometimes see in stories. But many of them are political centrists and can lean conservative on issues that affect their pocketbooks.

Many political reporters and their editors don't talk about their partisan beliefs. And some, including Post Executive Editor Len Downie, don't vote. Others don't vote in primaries if they have to register with a party. And, let's face it, readers don't care about the political leanings of reporters who cover the Washington Redskins.

Conservative talk-show hosts love to criticize the media as too liberal because they see everything through an ideological lens; journalists do not. The answer to the bias question is much more complicated than that.

Journalism tends to draw to its ranks those who are idealistic, who want to right society's ills and who look upon their work as a calling. They look at journalism less as a job with a business than as a calling to public service, which can put them at odds with their own business executives.

Journalists possess two traits that are more important than political beliefs. By their very nature, good journalists are skeptical. The old newsroom saying goes: "If your mother says she loves you, check it out." And they challenge authority in whatever form it exists. Ask any president. I've read The Post for 16 years, and Post journalists were every bit as tough on Bill Clinton as on the Bushes before and after him.

There's an old satirical line from Mr. Dooley, the character created by American humorist Finley Peter Dunne, that newspapers "comfort th' afflicted" and "afflicts th' comfortable." There's a lot of truth in that. Journalists tend to be softhearted toward the afflicted or the underdog, which tends to make them less critical of illegal immigrants or poor people in bad straits, and more hard-nosed toward those who wield power.

But don't some pols and other powerful people get better press than others? Sure. Reporters like best the ones who talk to them (duh) and are willing to mix it up. Witness the appeal of John McCain, not a liberal, who gets a lot of positive coverage.

Add to all this the thrill of a great political story and a change in power, and it's no wonder reporters were salivating over the closeness of races for major offices in the region and for control of Congress. Don't expect reporters to go soft on the Democrats, either. The story is always more important than ideology.

Tom Rosenstiel, a former reporter who directs the Project for Excellence in Journalism , said, "I think there is a lot of liberal bias, and it's a serious problem -- much more than journalists realize. But the suspicion of many conservatives that journalists are consciously trying to help liberals or push a liberal agenda is manifestly not true. Most journalists want to be independent and have an ingrained professionalism. Journalists tend to think the liberal issue is phony, because they're trying to be fair. But unfairness exists, and too often it may not be perceived or detected."

Rosenstiel would like to see more intellectual diversity among journalists. "More conservatives in newsrooms will bring about better journalism. We need to be more vigilant and conscious in looking for bias. Our aims are pure, but our execution sometimes is not. "

Bob Steele, a journalism ethics scholar at the Poynter Institute , thinks he's meeting more journalists with conservative views than in the past. He thinks it's "a red herring" to define any journalist in stark political terms and said "the best of newspapers have a check-and-balance system that minimizes the influence of personal belief."

Political scientist S. Robert Lichter, president of the Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University , agreed: "Journalists are trained to go beyond their values, but sometimes unconscious assumptions get into coverage. That's why God invented editors and ombudsmen," Lichter said.

This ombudsman believes the real issue is not what journalists believe or how they vote, but what is in the newspaper. It's my job to be the watchdog, so you tell me if you see bias, and I will write more on this subject important to the credibility of The Post and all journalists.

Deborah Howell can be reached at 202-334-7582 or atombudsman@washpost.com.