Is it fair reporting?

[leatherneck]

Is it fair reporting for a news media to report that a Presidential candidate announced an economic policy and then report that "some economists disagree with the policy" but not state that some economists do agree with the policy, and then only interview the economists that disagree with the policy but not interview the economists that do agree with the policy? I don't think it is fair reporting, but I'm curious to know what others think. In my mind, it is a subtle way to allow the news media's possible bias to influence voters. I'll provide the details after people tell me their thoughts.

[AcesFull]

Is it fair reporting for a news media to report that a Presidential candidate announced an economic policy and then report that "some economists disagree with the policy" but not state that some economists do agree with the policy, and then only interview the economists that disagree with the policy but not interview the economists that do agree with the policy? I don't think it is fair reporting, but I'm curious to know what others think. In my mind, it is a subtle way to allow the news media's possible bias to influence voters. I'll provide the details after people tell me their thoughts.

I agree, Leatherneck, but this kind of media "analysis" is what Senator McCain can expect through November.

 

The mainstream media will be repaying him for all of his quotable barbs at Republicans over the years by doing whatever they can do to ensure a Democratic victory. McCain will not get a fair shake during the general campaign and it will be interesting to watch the lengths to which the media will go to help elect a totally unqualified socialist to the presidency.

 

In the interest of fairness, the media will be getting economists like Paul Krugman to analyze the economic plans of both candidates.

[True blue (and gold)]

I agree, Leatherneck, but this kind of media "analysis" is what Senator McCain can expect through November.

 

The mainstream media will be repaying him for all of his quotable barbs at Republicans over the years by doing whatever they can do to ensure a Democratic victory. McCain will not get a fair shake during the general campaign and it will be interesting to watch the lengths to which the media will go to help elect a totally unqualified socialist to the presidency.

 

In the interest of fairness, the media will be getting economists like Paul Krugman to analyze the economic plans of both candidates.

 

Here we go on the bias bandwagon...of course this will only be a problem with the Republican nominee.

[woodsrider]

I agree, Leatherneck, but this kind of media "analysis" is what Senator McCain can expect through November.

 

The mainstream media will be repaying him for all of his quotable barbs at Republicans over the years by doing whatever they can do to ensure a Democratic victory. McCain will not get a fair shake during the general campaign and it will be interesting to watch the lengths to which the media will go to help elect a totally unqualified socialist to the presidency.

 

In the interest of fairness, the media will be getting economists like Paul Krugman to analyze the economic plans of both candidates.

I don't see where he said it was about McCain.

[woodsrider]

And to answer leathernecks original question, I it would be very bias reporting by the media to do so.

[pigman]

I don't think LR and Ace would be upset if it was a democratic candidate being treated this way.

[75center]

Of course it's not fair reporting but it is what it is. Not going to change.

[NineOh]

I think the part where they say "some economists disagree" is more than fair. The "some" tells us that "others do agree."

 

The problem is if they only interview one side and not interview another that may challenge that thinking.

[MoreheadEagle]

They showed the person who had the idea (candidate) and someone who disagrees (economist) that's pretty fair. It would have been unfair if they said "other's disagree" and not given some example.

[H]

In my mind, it's up to the politician advocating the policy position to make their case effectively. I don't have a problem with not including an interview with a third-party person who agrees with the politician as a counterbalance to the third-party person who disagrees, although I think it would strengthen the quality of the reporting.

[pnthr4life]

Does it really matter? I mean, it doesn't matter which of the candidates states their policy, it is going to criticized by some.

[cch5432]

I have actually been wondering for a while- what economists favor more taxes and less free market policies?

 

Krugman, and Jeffrey Sachs (kind of). Anybody know of any other economists?

[leatherneck]

I don't think LR and Ace would be upset if it was a democratic candidate being treated this way.

 

If you meant LN and not LR, you don't know me very well if that's what you think; not well at all.

[leatherneck]

Does it really matter? I mean, it doesn't matter which of the candidates states their policy, it is going to criticized by some.

 

I agree and expect that; what I don't expect is any news organization to unfairly report on any candidate. When reporting that some economists disagree (which implies that some agree) with a candidates policy and then only interviewing those that do disagree, it comes across as unfair, which is the point I was making.

[Guest Bluto]

I don't think LR and Ace would be upset if it was a democratic candidate being treated this way.

 

Wow, PM, your mind-reading abilities are impressive.

 

 

Actually, LN asked an analytical question that would be true for EITHER side of the political spectrum. Is it fair to interview only ANTAGONISTS of the speaker, but not supporters.