THE MEDIA AND OUR COUNTRY'S AGENDA
603
Gary Shapiro:
Earlier in this country's history, there were newspapers
that were overtly Republican or Democratic; they took sides. Was it a
healthy thing-that they did not take an objective, neutral position?
Also, is there just as much danger of media bias on the right, among
conservative publications, as well as on the left?
Michael Meyers:
Well, there was no question that in those days there were
lots of newspapers; they were a marketplace of ideas, and publishers had
a right to their point of view. They could put their point of view on edi–
torial pages, on opinion pages and, yes, a lot of people put their opinion
on the front pages, on the news pages. My objection is not to that, but to
those who purport to be objective, who purport to look for "all sides of
an issue" and do not seek out differences; or who stereotype viewpoints,
in terms of racial or other politically correct positions. And even when
you catch them in their bias and point it out to them-and I could give
you many war stories-they make it clear that they are not to be criti–
cized. They make no correction, they don't apologize, they don't publish
your letter, because they own the press. This is their right, but in a free
society those of us who spot bias have to speak up, to document it and
talk about it. Eventually, somebody may get the message and get embar–
rassed. 1 think that Joanna, earlier, was talking about how the
New York
Times
rarely corrects itself. But recently it did put in an editor's note
about a stilted photograph of a pro-Israeli demonstration in New York
City. They got so much criticism ftom readers and from inside the
New
York Times
that they put in a correction on page two. That rarely hap–
pens in the
New York Times,
but, hey, sometimes readers' feedback and
criticism about glaring bias and mistakes gets results-not most times.
John Patrick Diggins:
Ed, how does Hilton Kramer's portrait of the
New York Times
sit with your experiences?
Edward Rothstein:
Well, I resolved not to talk about the
Times .
Of
course there are times when I think the
Times
is wrong. The example of
the photo was one of them. But there is a more general journalistic
problem.
It
is sometimes extraordinarily difficult to break through
whatever preconceptions exist on a particular subject. One must first
become aware of one's own preconceptions and then assess their truth
and validity. Then one must determine what it would mean to free one–
self of such preconceptions: how would it alter the questions one con–
siders important and the answers one considers sufficient? And then one
would have to demonstrate that impartiality and assess how it will be
