Last week, I wrote about the ways many newsrooms and journalists fight against the perception of bias in their work.
I do want to note, however, some areas where I think journalists can be biased. And I mean in news coverage, separate from the institutional position of the newspaper on its editorial page.
Several areas come to mind immediately. We are unabashedly in favor of the truth, of a free press, of government transparency and of citizen participation in government, primarily exercising the right to vote.
These are somewhat interrelated, and they spring from the integral role a free press has in our democratic society. Many newsrooms, no matter how small, focus on functions of government such as legislative action, school board votes, city hall decisions, policing policies and similar. That is because our role as a government watchdog, a check on the powers of government, is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.
An article about the activities of the Senate Judiciary Committee of the Oregon Legislature may not receive much reader attention but we dedicate time and resources to that coverage regardless — because the actions of those legislators affect everyday Oregonians.
The Associated Press recently made headlines when it appointed a “democracy editor” to “managing coverage on challenges to democracy, voting rights, election processes and related areas,” as CNN Business put it.
The pursuit of truth has always been a driving force behind our work. The shift in recent years has been an increased willingness, without equivocation, to call out untruths bluntly. I acknowledge this has caused discomfort for some readers, who do not like to read wire service articles that call out some of former President Donald Trump’s statements as “falsehoods.”
In my view, it does no one any good to try to soften the blow when something is undeniably factual. Some readers may wince when they read Trump’s narrative of a stolen election is a false one but it is not appropriate or correct to present “both sides” of that equation. One side is true and the other is not.
I was very struck by a recent article about political scientists who paid regular Fox News viewers to watch CNN for a month instead. The researchers wanted to know if a different media diet would change viewers’ perceptions or if the beliefs of regular Fox viewers would be too ingrained to shift.
“Despite regular Fox viewers being largely strong partisans,” the researchers concluded, “we found manifold effects of this change in their media diets on factual beliefs, attitudes, perceptions of issues’ importance, and overall political views.” The study, which took place during September 2020, was conducted by political scientists David Broockman of the University of California, Berkeley, and Joshua Kalla, Yale University.
In the past, I’ve encouraged readers of The Oregonian/OregonLive to have a broad and diverse media diet. Exposure to a variety of news sources and bringing an open mind – not to mention critical thinking – to those sources can only benefit readers.
In the other areas I mentioned, you will see our support for a free press in our reporting on any attempts to muzzle or control our coverage. Our support for government transparency plays out in our news coverage in many ways. We will press public agencies for information and call out when they do not disclose it. We will appeal the lack of disclosure through official channels and sometimes through the courts.
As for citizen participation in government, as elections draw near, we produce many articles that lay out candidates’ positions on major subjects, often verbatim. We inform Oregonians about looming deadlines to register to vote and then to get ballots back to the elections office. We regularly write about efforts to get initiatives on the ballot.
We maintain a database of legislative activity, where readers can track proposed legislation and read testimony or submissions to the legislative panel. We explain government processes so citizens can take part in shaping policies or law. Find it at gov.oregonlive.com.
That same database has an address lookup tool so if you don’t know who your legislators are or who represents you in Congress, we can help you find out.
Some researchers have found that with the decline of local news comes an increase in partisanship. That makes a certain amount of sense: With less independent information to base decisions on, voters may choose a party line.
Oregon, and Portland, have always been blessed with marvelously engaged residents. This state is, after all, an early adopter of the citizen initiative, which allows residents to bypass the legislature to get measures in front of voters.
Our hope is that our coverage helps Oregonians navigate local and state government, both in terms of understanding the forces at play behind decisions but also ways to engage with the political process.
Thanks to all of our subscribers and advertisers who make our work possible.
