Media Bias?

For the last several years, conservatives in both Canada and the US have railed on about two things - so-called "Judicial Activism", and the bias of a "lib-left" media.

Yesterday's "good-news/bad-news" revelations for Liberals - the bad news being the latest from the Gomery Commission; the good news being a byelection win in Happy Valley-Goose Bay provides a perfect opportunity to take a look around at various media sources and assess just how "biased" they appear to be.

Target #1 - The CBC

Critics have long charged that the CBC is no more than a Liberal-biased mouthpiece for the Federal Liberal party.

At 7:00 AM this morning, the top 3 headlines on CBC:

Adverse Drug Reaction Database Goes Online
Queen to Wrap Up Canadian Visit
More Murder Charges Against Pickton

Both stories referenced above had already made their way onto the "oh-by-the-way" list below the main headlines. The two stories contained a reasonable amount of descriptive content, and a link to the Kroll report in PDF format was present.

Target #2 - The Sun Newspapers

I've always considered the Sun newspapers "journalism lite". They are mostly a vehicle to sell advertising, and the stories tend to be short, pithy and lacking in sufficient detail to be truly informative.

Across Canada, it's a mixed bag. The Calgary Sun is screaming in outrage over the Kroll report, and scarcely finds space to mention the byelection occurring; the Edmonton Sun's front page is all about the Royal Visit. The headline page on Canoe mentions the byelection and someone from the PMO who is due to testify before Gomery - almost as if the Kroll audit never happened.

As near as I can tell, the Sun newspapers looked at what was going to sell the most copies this morning in their respective markets, and used that to decide what was going to drive their content. (No surprise, when your revenue stream is all about eyeballs and advertisers)

Target #3 - The National Post

Once Conrad Black's favorite toy, now largely controlled by the Aspers through Canwest Global.

Sure enough, the lead headline screams in outrage over the Kroll report. Creditably, there is a secondary article talking about the byelection win. Both stories attempt to provide a reasonable amount of detail. The writing itself clearly contained a certain amount of "editorial lean" to it, but not so much as to be blatantly partisan.

Target #4 - The Globe and Mail

According to conservative pundits, the Globe and Mail is almost as offensive as the CBC is. Their coverage is almost the polar opposite of the The National Post's - visual prominence is given to the by-election (mostly by presenting a photograph as well as the headline).

Both stories are reasonably detailed, and more or less factual. The print edition of the Globe gave more prominence to the Gomery revelations than the electronic edition did.

Conclusions? It's pretty hard for me to claim that there is a pro-liberal or pro-conservative bias really. The nationally oriented news bodies (CBC, National Post, Globe and Mail) all seemed to try to present things in a reasonable and balanced fashion. The Sun Newspapers, along with other "local market" papers I looked at pretty much tried to play to their local market, and what would play well there. The Calgary Sun (as one would expect) was full of righteous outrage, but the Edmonton Sun was clearly more interested in Her Majesty's visit to Alberta.

If there was a bias, it was in the Calgary Sun - and that bias was decidedly partisan indeed. (No surprise there)

I didn't go after editorial content such as columnists. Those are opinion pieces, and are often meant to be provocative. They reflect the writers, and to some degree the editors behind them. As long as the presentation of the facts is reasonably straight-forward, I don't see any point in getting all wound up about individual commentators (at least in terms of claiming "media bias")