So the American media were biased in favour of Barack Obama, were they? Gee. Thanks for telling me, I would never have guessed.

Well, it’s now official, so guesswork is no longer required. As the inevitable backlash against Obamaphoria starts to set in, the American media are slowly, sheepishly stepping forward to make their public confessions, one by one.
Yes, it’s true, they all admit: we were rooting for the Democrats. We all tweaked our coverage to give Obama that teeny, weeny little bit more credibility than his rival, John McCain. Starting with Deborah Howell, the Washington Post’s ombudsman, who admitted that the newspaper was “tilting for Obama” (presumably she meant “towards”, but hey! Let’s not resort to linguistic terrorism here...)
Then there was Jeff Post of the Business Media Institute, who accused the American media of pursuing a policy of ‘not scrutinising’ the Illinois senator’s background enough... failing to note, among other important details, the fact that Obama once smoked a joint while still at college (Ah, but did he inhale? And if so, is that where he got all his healthcare policy ideas from...?)

Meanwhile, a certain freelance columnist by the name of Steve Roberts even admitted on CNN that “there was an imbalance” in coverage given to the two candidates. For instance, the fact that Rolling Stone, Time, Newsweek, Vanity Fair and pretty much every other glossy magazine you’ve ever heard of had at least one Obama cover and/or shoot during election week. In fact, some had several: “The Obamas at home”; “The Obamas at the beach”; “Little Obama on the Prairie”, etc. And of course, not a single McCain mugshot anywhere to be seen (except for the popular publication “Guns’n’Bibles”, which also had a centrefold of Sarah Palin in a fig-leaf).
And perhaps most damning of all: Telegraph columnist Gerald Warner recently warned that American newspapers had downplayed the fact that Palin had been acquitted of “abuse of power” in the notorious Troopergate inquiry.
Having gone to town with the accusation which prompted the inquiry in the first place – i.e., that the Alaskan Governor had unfairly dismissed a Commissioner for failing to fire a state Trooper who had divorced her own sister – the papers apparently omitted to give quite the same weight to the inquiry’s verdict, which found that: “Governor Palin's firing of Commissioner Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority...”

So all things told: yes, I suppose you could say there was a certain “pro-Obama” feeling in the air ahead of the November 4. And it appears that none of the major US networks and newspapers wanted to be left out of all the post-election parties come November 5, either. So now, the European media are having fun tearing their Transatlantic equivalents to shreds over such “shameful” and “shocking” revelations of political media bias.

Shameful? Shocking? What a bunch of shameless hypocrites, more like it. After all, this is Europe we’re talking about here. Land of the bias-free media, in which no television journalist has ever been investigated (still less sacked) for exposing to the world what we now all know to have been perfectly true all along – i.e, that a European government took its country to war on an utterly fabricated pretext.
And is this not also the same conglomeration of sovereign, democratic nations in which newspapers and television/radio stations religiously adhere to a policy of zero political bias when it comes to reporting electoral campaigns?

‘Course it is. This is after all the Old Continent: not some far-flung former British colony with a bee in its “hood”, and a “Freedom Fry” on its shoulder. So let’s look at a few examples of good old-fashioned European journalism, maybe those dumbo Americans will learn from our superior sense of media ethics.
Starting with... let’s see now... the nation with the most renowned tradition for spectacularly impartial editorial commentary? That’s right, the United Kingdom.

Admire, for instance, that classic 1992 scorcher headline: “IT’S THE SUN WOT WON IT!”
Yes, folks: it was indeed The Sun wot won the general election for Conservative Party under John Major at the expense of Labour’s Neil Kinnock; after the following, totally unbiased headline appeared on election day itself: “IF KINNOCK WINS TODAY, WILL THE LAST PERSON TO LEAVE BRITAIN PLEASE TURN OUT THE LIGHTS?”
Tilting towards Major? God, no. Just some sound, practical advice on how to save electricity, and reduce one’s household bills.

Then, there was that other fine quality British newspaper named... oh, hang on, it’s The Sun again... which came up with the following exquisite little headline to express its mild Euro-scepticism in the face of Jacques Delors’ plans for a federal Europe: “UP YOURS, DELORS!”
Well, if nothing else you’ve to hand to the Brits. So elegant. So refined...

I’m afraid I can’t comment about similar, shining examples of German, Hungarian, Austrian or Scandinavian media ethics, but I have read the occasional Italian newspaper in my time, and... ma mi faccia il piacere, porca vacca (e cosi’ via)... (similar experience with French newspapers such as ‘Liberation’: mais me fait le plaisir, voulez-vous cochon avec moi, etc.)
As for TV – apart from the rather glaring fact that some 90% of the Italian variety happens to belong to the Prime Minister in person – anyone who’s ever watched Emilio Fede, Giuliano Ferrara and (over to the other side) Michele Santoro and Lilli Gruber will know a thing or two about unbiased Italian news commentary. (Actually, I’ll take that back. The ones who’ve watched Gruber will probably just stare vacantly into space for days afterwards, a faint smile spreading slowly across their faces...)

Over to Malta now, where we tend not to name our newspapers after nearby class G Yellow Dwarf-type stars (because, unlike the UK, we happen to have the real thing instead), and... tell you what, let’s play a game.
Below are a few excerpts from editorials of local (independent) newspapers in the days and weeks before the last general election. See if you can guess which newspaper is which (and to play fair, I’ve chucked in at least one quote from MaltaToday), and which direction they happen to be tilting towards.
Ready? Here goes:

“Is the electorate prepared to swap this administration for a party that is showering promises like confetti in a festa afternoon march? With their mistakes and all, the Nationalists have shown a clear sense of direction all the time... The man at the helm, given top marks for trust and credibility, inspires the confidence needed for the country to keep moving forward...”

“Who of the two has the better policies to guarantee a better education? A guaranteed free health service? Management of the economy? Fight against corruption? Sustainable environment? Responsible fiscal policy? And most of all: management of the European project?”

“The basic argument which undermines all that Labour is saying is quite simple: why insist on change of policies when the policies in action today have brought growth, a certain affluence and a rather comfortable standard of living?”

“(Harry Vassallo) said last week that ‘in a few weeks’ time we could be experiencing a new political era in the country where no one is a winner or a loser’. He is wrong, since the very nature of politics dictates that there must be winners and losers. And if the election produces a coalition government, that loser would be Malta.”

“So corruption is part of the national DNA. We are a Mediterranean people. And our ethical standards are unfortunately not those what are reputed to be in northern European countries.” (In response to the Malta Labour Party campaign, which was entirely built around corruption)

Oh, and just to prove that local media bias is by no means limited to our own politics – being such a generous country, and all – let’s not forget the immortal leading article (again, you can guess the newspaper for yourselves) on the last Sunday before US elections 2004, under the headline: ‘THE WORLD NEEDS GEORGE BUSH’.
(Note: at the time I had scrawled the following proviso underneath in pencil “... like it needs a bayonet in the backside”... only to be promptly arrested, and placed on the next extraordinary rendition flight to Guantanamo Bay).

So back to those nasty, evil, biased American journalists, who just couldn’t keep their personal, political preferences from ruining an otherwise thoroughly enjoyable Presidential election for the rest of the unbiased world...
Shame on you all. Tsk, tsk, tut, tut...

One last thing...
On the subject of Malta’s fine, impartial newspapers: reading one of them the other day, I came across a most astonishing piece of news.
It seems that Edward de Bono – the lateral thinker, not the Irish rockstar – has suggested we invest in a ‘Palace of Thinking’.
Hmm. Excuse me, Mr de Bono, but... since when does one need a “palace” in which to “think”? Diogenes the Cynic, for instance, was one of the greatest thinkers of his age (no small feat, by the way... he shared his age with Socrates) and guess what? He did most of his thinking in nothing more luxurious than a barrel, which he shared with a couple of dogs.
Well, I’m something of a cynic myself, and I can perfectly understand that “Barrel of Thinking” just doesn’t have the same kind of ring to it. So I can’t help suspecting that Mr de Bono may be a good deal more interesting in the “Palace” part, than in the actual “Thinking”.
Just a (lateral) thought...

 

PRINT THIS ARTICLE