Abstract
This paper argues against media reporting of lobbying scandals when that reporting is couched in a liberal bias so that consumers of media get only a partial story of what is actually occurring in Washington. There are other voices, indeed, that need to be heard, but in the present state of media reporting, are not and may never be heard with the same vehemence that liberal voices are heard.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Media Ethics Issue".
Summary
It is a timeworn phrase that the media in the United States has a distinctive liberal bias. There is an equal timeworn phrase that asserts that Washington is corrupt, and regardless of party affiliation, our senators and representatives will do everything they can to enrich themselves at public expense. The liaison for this unholy political alliance is the modern lobbyist. Millions and millions of dollars change hands during any session of Congress, in exchange for favorable legislation. Though this is certainly a problem, and a serious one, there is another problem of equal seriousness that no one seems to care about– that any political scandal related to lobbying may not receive equal treatment in the press as others will. When one looks up a history of lobbying scandals in the last 100 years, nearly all of them that are reported involve those who are conservative, and it is difficult to find one whose perpetrators were liberal. That is another hint that there is a liberal bias in the media.
“Lay not up treasures for yourselves”” says Matthew (6:19, NIV). But in fact that is what occurs on a daily basis, and the media is somehow complicit in that by the by the facts and people they choose not to report on, and by those they do. Christians, Fackler, Richardson, Kreshel and Woods (2011) assert that the media frequently rejects advertising that is not ideologically compatible with the media’s message. Olasky (2013) asserts that “non-Christian presuppositions dominate” the field of journalism generally (Appendix, para 2), while Wildavsky (1991, p. 123, is quoted in Ecarma (2003, p. 56) as saying “what is necessary in order to test theories of media bias directly are surveys of its members’ political preferences and investigation of their stories. In this way, the relationship between their preferences and their reporting, if any, may be appraised.” An investigation of “their stories” displays the media’s liberal bias for all to see.
Arguing Points
Nearly everyone who is over the age of 20 likely remembers hearing about the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal. Most of those caught up in the scandal were Republicans, and the liberal media, with great glee, completely skewered anyone even remotely connected with the case. But it wasn’t the first lobbying scandal, and probably will not be the last. There has been, in fact, in the last five years, been a lobbying scandal (Kaplan Education and the Washington Post) (Weiss, 2012) of massive proportions that has barely been reported in the news media. But this scandal points up three salient facts: lobbying in Washington can, even in roundabout ways, point to culture of corruption in America’s national politics, regardless of party; secondly, we will hear more about Republican lobbying scandals then we will hear about liberal lobbying scandals, simply because of the nature of the ideological press which operates nearly unchecked in this country, and third, lobbyists, who contribute incredible amounts of money to political campaigns, and even soft-money that does not have to be reported, are rarely, if ever, held to account for their actions.
Conclusion
The media’s liberal bias has been known and written about for decades. Even in changing political times, whether the majority in Washington is Democratic or Republican, the liberal bias remains the same. Reports of lobbying scandals typically focus on those involving Republican members of Congress, while any others are given less reporting space, and thus, less public conversation about the scandal. Yet, there are voices clamoring for the other side to be heard, and if not for the media’s habit of ignoring of entire segments of the population by routinely rejecting messages with which it does not agree (Christians, Fackler, Richardson, Kreshel and Woods, 2011, p. 160), these voices would be heard, but traditionally and perhaps always, these voices will rarely be heard with the same kind of seriousness that attaches to liberal voices.
- Christians, C. G., Fackler, M., Richardson, K. B., Kreshel, P. J., and Woods, R. H. (2011). Media ethics: Cases and moral reasoning. (9th ed.). Pearson. pp. 160-161.
- Ecarma, R. E. (2003). Beyond ideology: A case of egalitarian bias in the news? Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
- Holy Bible, New International Version (NIV). (2011). Matthew 6:19. Biblica, Inc.
- Olasky, M. (2013). Prodigal press: Confronting the anti-Christian bias of the American news media. New York: P&R Press. Retrieved from http://www.worldmag.com
- Weiss, R. (2012). Scandal at the Washington Post: Fraud, lobbying, and insider trading. Accuracy in Media. Retrieved from http://www.aim.org
