StarTribune.com

Fairness a main tenet of political coverage

Posted on January 13th, 2008 – 2:20 PM
By Nancy Barnes

Around 4:30 p.m. on the day of the Iowa caucuses, we had already signed off on a front-page display that included one dominant photograph when Dennis McGrath, a senior editor in charge of political coverage, raised a concern: Don’t we want to give equal treatment to both parties’ winners?

With that question, I knew the political season had truly begun.

I have been managing front-page displays on and off for more than a decade, and there is little that causes more frustration in a campaign season than trying to find a way to equally balance the photographs. From a visual perspective, a front page is more arresting if it is dominated by one strong image; page designers and photographers will almost always argue that one picture is better than several of equal size. But give prominent display to a Democrat one day, and the Republicans complain that we are a liberal rag. Lead with a Republican and the Democrats cry foul, regardless of the news value of the story. Some days, campaign workers see bias in the image that we pick, suggesting that we deliberately choose pictures that make candidates look unattractive.

And on it goes. These concerns don’t stop at photographs, but extend to headlines, captions, story play, the way we label candidates (conservative vs. liberal), the sources we choose and even the number of paragraphs in a story devoted to one candidate vs. another.

There is good reason for this, of course. Nothing is more important in our country than free, open elections, and the press has a powerful voice in informing the electorate. We lose credibility with readers if we look like we are favoring one candidate or party over time, and we all know that newspapers have the reputation of leaning left.

This year, I have asked McGrath to put together a group of editors, including photographers and copy editors, to examine ways in which political bias can creep into the paper and how we might prevent it. His group will look at everything from how we handle photographs as the campaign progresses to how we ensure that headlines written late at night don’t suggest a liberal or conservative bent. We want to bend over backwards to be fair, but we don’t want to bend over so far backwards that we aren’t telling uncomfortable truths when they need to be told. I believe that readers are more likely to trust us with the truth if they trust that we are being fair.

One response to "Fairness a main tenet of political coverage"

RoyMpls says:

February 19th, 2008 at 12:18 am

I think “fairness” is a pretty worthless concept if you don’t do any work to differentiate candidates’ views or attitudes towards the issues they will be handling if they reach the highest office in the land.

Do you think your readers will decide how to vote based on the placement of a photo on page one? In that case, how about a presidential coloring contest?

Yes, it’s a fun horse race. It’s fun, fun, fun to see who’s ahead in the polls, who won Nevada, who’s going to win Wisconsin. How fun will it be living under a McCain presidency? No new taxes plus an unlimited commitment to war in the Middle East? Will that mean cuts to Social Security or just more borrowing and Chinese ownership of the country?

If you don’t cover the issues, McCain comes off like a nice grandfather-in-chief, Obama as an inspiring orator, and Clinton as, well, you get the idea.

I am not cynical enough to believe that you just refuse to cover issues because it’s in the best interests of your shareholders to maintain Republican rule.

So… why then?

Why can’t you tell us what McCain would do to Iran? Or how Obama would profess to handle Osama. Or how Hillary would handle foreign trade?

If you’re covering the 35W bridge collapse investigations, you will mention that the bridge fell down back in August. You even mention that current bridge and road maintenance is running billions of dollars lower than Mn/DOT estimates of the need for maintenance.

If you’re covering the primaries, we’re lucky to find out the current delegate count. Why is that? Budget cuts? Or do you think no one cares about leadership qualities, or issues?

I just don’t get it.
-Roy