As reported by Mark Jurkowitz in the Boston Globe (5/24/04), a poll conducted by the Pew Research Center in collaboration with the Project for Excellence in Journalism and the Committee of Concerned Journalists, surveyed more than 500 professionals from the national and local media. According to Mr. Jurkowitz:
Most of the respondents declared themselves political moderates, but the percentage of national journalists who described themselves as liberal rose from 22 percent in 1995 to 34 percent in 2004, while the ranks of liberal local journalists jumped from 14 percent to 23 percent. Only 7 percent of national journalists and 12 percent of local journalists described themselves as conservative.
Furthermore, the media feel that they are being too kind to President Bush.
A press corps that is growing increasingly liberal is inclined to believe that President Bush has gotten an easy ride from the news media....Fifty-five percent of the national press corps and 37 percent of local journalists said coverage of the president has not been critical enough; 8 percent of the national press and 19 percent of local journalists said the media have been too critical.
And, Mr. Jurkowitz goes on to state:
That stands in stark contrast with the general public's assessment - 34 percent of Americans say the media have been too critical of the president, and only 24 percent say they have not been tough enough.
Does this liberal tilt in the media affect coverage of the news? Professional journalists would probably say no, but the PPTO is not so sure. We can think of two huge stories that have gotten scant attention in the media, and we wonder whether liberal bias could explain this lack of news coverage. The under-reported stories are:
 | The astounding success of welfare reform |
| The corruption of campaign finance reform - primarily by Democrats |
With regard to welfare reform, the Heritage Foundation reports:
The successful track record of welfare reform in reducing child poverty is stunning. For a quarter-century prior to reform, black child poverty and poverty among single mothers remained virtually constant. Six years after reform, poverty among both groups dropped rapidly, reaching the lowest levels in U.S. history. In all recessions since the beginning of the War on Poverty in the mid-1960s, child poverty has increased sharply; but in the 2001 recession, child poverty did not rise at all.
Despite the incredibly positive results, don't hold your breath waiting for the national media to shine a light on the welfare story.
The big news regarding campaign finance reform is that the chief architects of the reform (Democrats) are now the ones (primarily) circumventing the legislation by use of "527 organizations" (nonprofit entities that, ostensibly, are not political, but are political in reality). In The Hill (11/5/03) Byron York reports:
[A] recent study by the Center for Public Integrity found
that in the 2002 cycle, Democratic-affiliated 527 groups spent $185 million —
more than twice the $82 million spent by Republican-affiliated groups.
And contributions like [millionaire Democrat] Soros’s will make the imbalance
even more pronounced in 2004.
Where are the campaign finance reform crusaders now? The silence is deafening.