Washington Post Admits Pro-Obama Bias

For weeks, almost months now, conservatives have written or spoken about the media’s love for Barack Obama (John McCain even had a video of media personalities professing their admiration for Obama set to music). Deborah Howell, the Washington Post’s Ombudsman, finally admitted in an article today that her own newspaper is heavily biased in favor of Barack Obama:

Democrat Barack Obama has had about a 3 to 1 advantage over Republican John McCain in Post Page 1 stories since Obama became his party’s presumptive nominee June 4. Obama has generated a lot of news by being the first African American nominee, and he is less well known than McCain — and therefore there’s more to report on. But the disparity is so wide that it doesn’t look good.

Ms. Howell included a quote from Bill Hamilton, the Post’s managing editor for politics, who offered this explanation:

We make our own decisions about what we consider newsworthy. We are not garment workers measuring our product every day to fulfill somebody’s quota. That means as editors we decide what we think is important, because that’s what our readers look for us to do — not to adhere to some arbitrary standard.

So covering both candidates equally is somehow an arbitrary standard now. And let’s be honest here. What’s newsworthy is completely subjective. What he may consider newsworthy may be total pap to someone else. Yet, Mr. Hamilton, an editor at the Washington Post, feels entitled to run as many pro-Obama pieces he wants (under the excuse they’re more newsworthy than stories about John McCain), publish all the liberal commentary he wants on Page 1 and call it objective journalism, and no one is allowed to say anything about it.

This disregard for objectivity isn’t just happening at the Washington Post, either, as Ms. Howell pointed out:

This is not just a Post phenomenon. The Project for Excellence in Journalism has been monitoring campaign coverage at an assortment of large and medium-circulation newspapers, broadcast evening and morning news shows, five news Web sites, three major cable news networks, and public radio and other radio outlets. Its latest report, for the week of Aug. 4-10, shows that for the eighth time in nine weeks, Obama received significantly more coverage than McCain.

This should not be a surprise to anyone who has followed this campaign. We saw the same pattern during the Democratic primary, when it was Hillary Clinton who was on the receiving end of the she’s not newsworthy enough standard.

While Hamilton and other editors in print and broadcast media continue with their pro Barack Obama bias free from any legislative repercussions, those in talk radio are fighting the heavy hand of censorship that the liberal Democrats in Congress are trying to bring down on their heads. It’s unfair, the liberals cry like little girls, that conservatives have found a voice for themselves in one medium, talk radio. Even though the liberals have monopolies in print, broadcast, and web media, it’s simply unacceptable that conservatives are having success in one. It’s outrageous and must be stopped, the liberals insist.

It’s a nice, cushy, little double standard Hamilton and his editor buddies have got going for themselves, isn’t it.

Obama to Pick VP This Week
The "when does life begin?" question wasn't always above his pay grade.