Media: Bias and Responsibility

Last week, the March for Life drew hundreds of thousands to our nation’s capital as voices for the unborn.  We arrived on buses from distant reaches of the country to march on the National Mall, converging as witnesses to the sanctity of life.  Our massive numbers moved peacefully, prayerfully through the streets towards the Supreme Court, filled with a quiet power of loving conviction.

Sadly, the March was largely neglected by mainstream media–the perpetual problem of the pro-life movement.  Professing objectivity and fairness, many news outlets apparently prefer the comfort of uncritical conformity instead, encouraging the passive suppression of certain issues.

Philadelphia Archbishop Charles J. Chaput wrote in his recent book, A Heart on Fire: Catholic Witness and the Next America, that this quality of contemporary media is a sign of serious disorder within American democracy.

In practice, a new body of ideas seems to shape the limits of acceptable thought in American public life.  This new orthodoxy influences the selection of news and how it gets presented.  It informs which opinions are appropriate and which won’t be heard.  And it it rigorously intolerant.  At its core, it involves a set of assumptions about the purpose of government, and the meaning of marriage, family, and sexuality, that differs sharply from past American habits of thought.

Rather than objectivity, we see here a portrait of journalism driven by agendas of political and social import.  This presents a serious problem for the democratic citizen.  Healthy democracy necessitates an informed populace, citizens who are aware of public policy and its consequences.  Yet when the citizen is presented with an ideological lens, it undermines his ability to make sound judgements when participating in government.

However, some in the media may have begun to acknowledge an error or inconsistency in their approach.  Margaret Sullivan, Public Editor for the New York Times, recently wrote that she disagreed with her paper’s coverage of the March for Life, arguing the inherent value to covering such events.

While certainly an improvement over muted silence, we must continue to hold journalists to a higher level of excellence.  They are the gatekeepers, mediators of critical information, and it is their duty to shed ideology in pursuit of the Truth.