The Bias Patrol may be getting a tad out of hand.
I’d hope that most journalists would appreciate skeptical readers who complain when they encounter news reports that appear to take sides in coverage either by omission or commission.
However, rooting out “media bias” has become an obsession for some readers who may not agree that idealistic zeal, like witch hunts, can set a dangerous course.
I don’t fault these readers entirely. I see the media doing things at times that I don’t care for, but I’ve also seen truth and consequences correct off-course coverage too many times to buy into the notion that American journalists are biased buffoons with no interest in fairness, accuracy and balance.
These thoughts follow recent signs of narrowly focused extremism coloring reader reaction to the use of “trickle” in a headline to describe sparse voter turnout in the first hour or so of elections in Iraq.
The verb provoked accusations of biased headlines.
One reader argued: “The use of the word ‘trickle’ on your front page headline to describe the historic voting in Iraq was worthy of al Jazeera and has to be in the Top 10 all-time examples of media bias.”
I thought it may be helpful in this “tricklegate” matter to help readers understand the bias that indeed was at work in the Star-Telegram’s newsroom on the night of Saturday, Jan. 29, as editors handled Iraq election coverage.
Please bear in mind that Saturday night’s deadline for the Sunday paper is midnight. There’s a grace period of about 15 minutes if, say, there’s an extraordinary need to hold Page One, but the deadline generally is enforced.
The Star-Telegram’s entire production, distribution and delivery system requires an on-time start.
Here’s a glance at what was happening in the newsroom:
10 p.m. Saturday — Two hours before deadline, it’s late here, but in Iraq, it’s time for polls to open on Sunday morning. The Star-Telegram’s national/foreign news desk monitors wire services’ Iraq election reports and developments while wrapping up the editing on other wire stories for the A section.
Close attention is paid to the scores of Iraq reports, especially The Associated Press’ filings. The AP moves updates rapidly and structures stories for quick reorganization. For years, editors have relied on the AP for election information. The same is true for the election in Iraq where the compelling unknown is the extent to which voters will vote.
10:30 p.m. — Photo editors are selecting pictures to illustrate Page One’s Iraq election package. They ultimately decide on a dominant photo of two U.S. soldiers guarding a polling station and a secondary photo of Iraqi President Ghazi al-Yawer preparing to vote.
As election-related reports come in, editors want to be sure that, among other things, readers will get basic information about what’s at stake for Iraq and Washington, the outlook for turnout, resistance and many other key points.
Back there on Pages 21A, 24A and 26A are supplemental packages prepared in advance to help readers understand the election and candidates in greater detail.
The ability to provide such information is one of a newspaper’s greatest strengths. The printed page cannot function in real time like electronic outlets, but we have a Web site that does.
We have ink and newsprint for informational graphics, summaries, photographs, maps, lists and other devices to give readers a significant depth and breadth of understanding the election.
11:34 p.m. — The national/foreign desk finishes editing early election stories. (There’s no turnout to speak of yet). The stories are sent to the copy desk.
11:35 p.m. — The copy desk receives a four-paragraph New York Times summary for Page One from Assistant Managing Editor John Gravois and a full Associated Press report for Page 26A from Assistant National/Foreign Editor Richard Kessler.
Copy editors work the stories, write headlines for them and send them to Copy Desk Chief Tim Sager for a final review.
11:50 p.m. — Sager releases the Page One summary to Sunday Coordinator Kate Gorman, who has designed the page and will flow the summary into place. The story for 26A is sent to News Designer Amanda Reiter.
Assistant Managing Editor/Operations Danny Vandegriff and other editors have jointly composed the main headline for Page One (“Hope, fear in Iraq”).
Midnight — Gorman holds Page One for a significant update in the summary. Reiter holds 26A for the update. And what is this news? Wires report there’s a “trickle” of voters — a small but crucial piece of the answer to the turnout question.
12:10 a.m. Sunday — Election updates are complete. Vandegriff and editors have written the secondary headline on 1A: “Amid scattered violence, voters trickle into polls.” Page One and Page 26A are released.
The 1A headlines employed keywords — simple, to-the-point language that summarizes facts dispassionately and accurately. That was the preference — the bias — that was at work.
By Sunday morning in Texas, a radically different story was unfolding in Iraq. As the lead headline for Monday’s 1A put it: “Defiant Iraqis cast millions of votes.”
As far as I can tell, no one complained about that headline.
Perhaps no one in the Bias Patrol would have complained about the Sunday headline if they had known what was happening in the newsroom.
They could have asked. One of the best cures for biased conclusions about bias is an unbiased question.
