TIME magazine's managing editor offers an intriguing question: why do newspapers endorse political candidates?
I'm curious what you think. You are the generation at issue here. What does it mean to you if the Wisconsin State Journal says it thinks you should pick, say, McCain over Huckabee. Take it closer to home. Does it matter who the Herald or Cardinal endorse as the best in the race? Does that kind of endorsement affect how you judge their objectivity or credibility?
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Should news organizations endorse candidates?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Despite the negative things that might go along with supporting candidates (appearing biased, the possibility of expecting a slant or bias in the rest of the paper from customers) opinion journalism is important.
Editorial boards are important. (I'm having trouble thinking of supporting anecdotes or facts, but I really believe they are - good thing I'm not writing for the opinion section for anything anymore)
I like the endorsing more in the primary stage. If they pick both a republican and a democrat, it doesn't make them feel AS biased as when a bias can be felt based on who they picked.
And finally, if WSJ says I should pick who I thought I was going to vote for anyway within the same party, I probably wouldn't even bother reading it. If they differed from my opinion I might check out their reasoning.
Endorsing candidate/s is an iffy issue because news outlets are expected to aim for balance and unbiased reporting.
However, opinion and news are two wildly different sections of a paper. It's basically the job of ed boards and opinion writers to make tough choices, interpret current events and engage the public in dialogue.
While the choices of the edboards and opinion staffs definitely can reflect the ideological and political slants of the people on them, it does not necessarily (and shouldn't) reflect the opinion of those who write NEWS articles.
I don't think it's as inappropriate as it is a reinforcement to many people of the bias they already suspect. However, for me, I think the bigger the paper and more respected it is, the more I would listen to their reason for supporting a candidate. If the Herald or Cardinal told me who to vote for it would mean about as much as the two people standing on the corner of Johnson and Park on the day of the primary trying to convince drivers and peds alike to vote for Hillary.
Newspapers are meant to be informative, yes, but I also think that the editorials are really a public forum for the newspaper and citizens to interact. If a certain newspaper endorses a particular candidate, I think that's okay. It will probably spark a lively debate and encourage readers to write in with their opinions.
I don't think that newspapers endorsing candidates will have much of an impact on the election because I like to think that Americans are capable of thinking for themselves and making decisions based on their own opinions, not those of their newspaper.
As a side note, I think endorsements from people like Oprah will have much more of an impact and I don't know how I feel about one of the most influential women in America very publicly endorsing Obama. Everything she touches turns to gold and I think she should stay out of the political arena.
News organizations should definitely not be endorsing candidates - although the news is not a significant influence for all consumers, there are some who will be incredibly influenced by the media. Journalists need to realize the power they have when they make statements that can influence the larger public.
Editorial columns are one thing - but when a paper like the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is endorsing Obama, it's almost as if they just became his Wisconsin state sponsor.
Also, about Oprah - I totally agree. Although, if she really wanted to get Obama's name out there, she should just put Audacity of Hope in her book club... without it, we wouldn't have half the best sellers we do today.
I think that endorsing candidates is fine in the world of editorials and opinion pages. Everyone realizes that these pieces are interpretations and personal stances. Its another thing when political views begin to make their way into the actual news. To what extent do you guys think that the New York Times article on John McCain this week was an interjection of the political values of the paper?
For me, newspaper endorsements only make me read the publication with more skepticism. It makes me questions every article and picture knowing who they have agreed to support.
I also think it is important to remember that not everyone on that paper's staff agrees with the overall choice. Individuals may be mis-associated with a candidate through their employer.
I don't see a problem with editorial boards endorsing candidates because they are seperate from the "hard news" aspect of a newspaper. However, the average reader may not pick up on that and think that it is an endorsement made by all the newspaper's staff.
journalism is supposed to be an unbiased, objective form of writing. if a paper chooses to support a candidate, it's choosing a side, which will most likely result in stories coming from that angle. editorials that do this are fine, because editorials are all about opinions, but i think it's important papers try to remain as neutral as possible and deliver news on candidates so that readers can make their own decisions.
I think endorsing candidates as a news organization is stupid. Lets say USA Today decides to endorse McCain...they would be loosing half of their audience. I read newspapers, etc to get the news, I do not want to be saturated with the same candidate...if anything its annoying. I don't care what the editor thinks about a candidate, dont express your opionions on me, GIVE ME THE NEWS!
Post a Comment