Accuracy in Media

Recent articles do little more than to further the infamous charges that accuse The New York Times of tilting heavily to the left.  It is so obvious that even the most moderate observer can see the clear distinction between bias and balance.

In early September, The New York Times attempted to paint the President as a flip-flopper (a major problem currently hindering the Kerry campaign) in two articles.  In the introduction to Elisabeth Bumiller and Philip Shenon’s story, they accused the President of “a sharp shift” in his position on the power that the proposed new national intelligence director should have.  In a similar article by David Stout he too accused the President of “shifting his stance” on the issue.

Both articles offer little, if any, evidence to indicate that the President ever held another position.  Mr. Stout offers no evidence, while Bumiller and Shenon’s piece proposes that the administration had previously “made clear” their position.  They fail, however, to put forth any concrete language or evidence that would clearly illustrate a prior stance on the issue.  The futile attempt to show the President as a flip-flopper falls flat.

Now, this might not seem so bad, at least to the casual reader; but The New York Times bias is evidenced in the contrast between these stories and another leading story, this one by Brian Knowlton about Presidential hopeful John Kerry.

Senator Kerry has spent much of his time lately criticizing the President’s decision to go to war in Iraq.  Nowhere in Mr. Knowlton’s article did he mention any “sharp shift” in Kerry’s position.  Funny, since not more than a month ago in a speech at the Grand Canyon, Kerry said he would have voted for the congressional resolution authorizing force against Iraq even if he had known at the time that no weapons of mass destruction would be found.

Kerry also criticized the President’s “catastrophic choice that has cost us $200 billion.”  Here, another flip-flop, or another “sharp shift” in his position, if you will, begs to be pointed out. When Kerry was asked on August 31st of last year by Tim Russert on Meet the Press, he said that we should spend “whatever number of billions of dollars it takes to win” in Iraq. 

Kerry has so many positions on so many issues that it is difficult to keep track.  It would be arduous to attempt, but refreshing to see someone point them out, someone with the resources of say, The New York Times.  A LITTLE BALANCE PLEASE!

Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.


Comments are turned off for this article.