March 22, 2006
The Publisher Of The Olympian Is Unhappy

John Winn Miller (who is, as far as I know, no relative of mine) says that this Cal Thomas column is unfair to journalists.

Cal Thomas, you've made me mad as hell, and I’m not going to take it anymore.

I'm tired of hearing radical columnists like you besmirch the good men and women who struggle daily to put out the very best newspaper they can.

Calling a conservative columnist a "radical" may not be the best way to show that your paper is not biased.  And Miller continues with this:

Of course, journalists are different from the general public.  We’re not "conservative" like you.  That's because we are skeptical of everyone and everything, particularly those in positions of power.  That’s our job.

Actually, journalists tend to be hostile to Republicans and religious conservatives.   Journalists are, at most, moderately skeptical of Democrats, and they are rarely skeptical of such leftwing groups as the Sierra Club or the NAACP.  It would be great if journalists were "skeptical of everyone and everything", but no serious person can believe that they are.

Need an example?  Compare how our local papers have treated Congressman McDermott and President Bush.  The Seattle Congressman broke the law by passing on an illegal tape of a conversation between the Republican leaders in the House of Representatives.   President Bush has, after consultation with legal experts, authorized the NSA to track the phone calls of Al Qaeda operatives to the United States.  The first was certainly illegal "wiretapping", as it is usually described, though no wires were involved.  The second was almost certainly legal.  But you would have to look hard to find much criticism of McDermott for his actions (and those of his accomplice, a New York Times reporter).

Need another example?  Go back and dig up the analysis that Media Research did of the change in economic stories after Bill Clinton took office.  The economy was recovering slowly in both 1992 and 1993, but the mix of stories was far more positive in 1993 than in 1992.

Miller is sure that: "The public appreciates what we do."  If they do, why is newspaper circulation falling, especially at our more liberal newspapers?

Finally, I must pass on a warning to publisher Miller.  Although Republicans and conservatives are not protected by our federal civil rights laws, evangelicals are.  And the nearly complete absence of evangelicals (and others with traditional religious beliefs) from newsrooms will result, I predict, in lawsuits against some of our major news organizations.  Successful, expensive, embarrassing lawsuits.

By way of News Busters.)

Posted by Jim Miller at March 22, 2006 06:42 AM | Email This
Comments
1. They may be putting out the best newspaper they can, but Cal is right - newspapers are going away for the most part.

Posted by: H Moul on March 22, 2006 06:47 AM
2. The gentleman doth protest too much.

Posted by: Obi-Wan on March 22, 2006 07:10 AM
3. Notice how the two different political parties protest? Read the editorial. The right protests by canceling their subscription. The left protests by showing up at his door, presumably to picket, threaten and intimidate.

Posted by: Obi-Wan on March 22, 2006 07:15 AM
4. I would be more interested in a paper if they were simply honest.

The Stranger is up front about being a liberal fringe paper.

The Least Intelligence, Seattle Slimes and Daily Zero are all dishonest. They claim objectivity and neutrality on issues. A cursory examination of the headlines show incredible bias.

I really don't give a rats a** if a paper or outlet is biased. They just need to be up front about it. I have more respect for publication like The Nation and The Stranger who proclaim their positions.

The other thing is web based publication can link to sources. When the Least Intelligence makes a claim, I can't immediately check the veracity if I have a question. Web based can provide access to sources allowing source to be evaluated.

Posted by: JCM on March 22, 2006 07:22 AM
5. This is a hot-button issue. I agree - we need to get conservative kids into journalism...

Posted by: A Watchdog on March 22, 2006 07:59 AM
6. I rarely read the Olympian and when I do it's online. We sometimes buy the Sunday paper (at Walmart where it's $0.50 cheaper!) ... for the ads. It's such a joke that it's not even worth sifting through the garbage to find actual news in that rag. We've been asked to subscribe and I always laugh. The only decent thing in there is the Michael's ads.

Posted by: Megs on March 22, 2006 08:00 AM
7. Helen Thomas: case and point. Of course there is a giant liberal bias in the news papers and academia.
You are obviously part of the smear machine if you point this out.

Miller states that he is supposed to be skeptical of everyone. I would agree to a point, except that they never share any good news coming out of Iraq, unemployment down to 4.7% nationally, violent crime rates are dropping, Inflation is not out of control, Our economy added more jobs last year than all of Europe combined, etc.

If it bleeds it leads. Thankfully there are other sites, channels, etc that post some of the good stuff.

Posted by: Jason Woodruff on March 22, 2006 08:06 AM
8. A newspaper is a device for making the ignorant more ignorant and the crazy crazier.

Posted by: H. L. Mencken on March 22, 2006 08:30 AM
9. The fact is that there are a few media outlets, including newspapers (e.g. Washington Times), that are more objective than their counterparts. They at least present a conservative viewpoint in many instances. And it's those same media outlets who are accused of being "far right" or "conservative outlets" by their newspaper and media bretheren.

Posted by: Palouse on March 22, 2006 09:03 AM
10. Oh, the journalistic ethics out there.

The local Snohomish County rag, the Herald, went to some council people in Everett and told them to either get along with their guy, a Democrat, or they would start printing nasties about them.

And, believe it or not, the rag won the staredown and now, all of a sudden, there is this unholy lovefest going on.

I haven't heard if any of the Seattle papers have that type of influence yet.

Posted by: tradersmith on March 22, 2006 09:08 AM
11. Isn't that rich! The folks that live in and around the Olympia call the Daily Olympian "The Daily 0" **As in ZERO**

World views are limited and local news is biased.

Olympia is a town that has live music of all types almost everynight of the week. Read the Daily O and you get the impression that you have to go to Seattle to have any fun.

Posted by: Jack Burton on March 22, 2006 10:01 AM
12. Perhaps the Grand Poobah of the Olympian would be well-served to read this ACCOUNTABILITY part of the Professional Journalist Code of Ethics he pretends to subscribe to:

"Be Accountable

Journalists are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other.

Journalists should:

Clarify and explain news coverage and invite dialogue with the public over journalistic conduct.
Encourage the public to voice grievances against the news media.
Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
Expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media.
Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.

John LOSER Miller has it exactly backwards. He should be THANKING Cal Thomas and other for their criticism....not shaming them!!!
Ohhhhhh, I forgot.....the Code of Ethics EXCLUDES The Olympian and John "Loser" Miller!!!!
The Code of Ethics cannot possibly apply to Miller. Seems like Miller is a bit too thin-skinned to be a real Journalist. Probably just another unemployed trust-funder whose parents bought him a job (like Baby Blethens)!

What an arrogant PR*CK!!!

Posted by: dude on March 22, 2006 10:33 AM
13. It's really interesting..I was just thinking this AM after reading my local paper..the Columbian..and comparing it with The Spokesman-Review(Spokane)that I would compose a letter to the C and tell them that I was a little sick of their unbalanced articles & cartoons that they run on the political pages. (Daily Bush-bashing) The Review is a balanced paper in comparison and what a breath of fresh air this is. Too bad, my husband needs his sports pages...I would cancel, as of yesterday!

Posted by: Susu on March 22, 2006 10:37 AM
14. It's softball editorials like this that sing the praises of Democrats, yet don't have one critical word to say about the budget, that regularly appear in the Times that supports Cal Thomas' points. In fact, he praises the setting aside of $1 billion, yet just yesterday it was reported that this money was already spent. The piece has nothing but praise for Gregoire and how "effective" this legislature has been. Puhlease.

Posted by: Palouse on March 22, 2006 11:24 AM
15. John Winn Miller's column is evidence of the Project for Excellence in Journalism's finding that, "Most liberals don't see a liberal point of view."

Most conservatives see conflicting positions on an issue as the result of subjective differences in individual perspectives, interests and values. Liberals are much more egocentric, and believe they are more enlightened and aware than others. They see their perspectives as the objective, absolute truth. They are personally offended by people who disagree with, or disapprove of them. They do not have a level of maturity that enables them to be aware that they too, are biased.

When conservatives disagree with John Winn Miller's newspaper they may cancel their subscriptions, take their business elsewhere, and let him alone to succeed or fail running his newspaper any way he pleases. Liberals are more likely to show up at his door, in some version of a temper tantrum, to intimidate, embarrass or otherwise pressure him into doing what they want.

Liberals like government because it enables them to use force against any who disagree with them.

Posted by: ken on March 22, 2006 12:05 PM
16. The only real newspaper is The Wall Street Journal. The rest are basically just fish wrap and bird cage liner.

Posted by: H Moul on March 22, 2006 12:35 PM
17. I actually used information from the Olympian this winter for a prayer meeting ! Way in the back pages has been a list of what the legislature does every day. yes, there are those of us who actually pray about government.
We need it.

Posted by: ljm on March 22, 2006 04:52 PM
18. I about gagged when I read his column. What planet does this guy live on? Every day the Daily Zero is filled to the brim with praise of the Anti-gov Gregoire, Pancake Rachel, eco-hoodlums and appeasement mongers (they call 'em peace protestors). They bash our country and president every turn even when they have to lie to do it, and bray about every military death without ever acknowledging our huge military achievments. No bias? Hah! His column just shows that the bias starts at the top, and they're all so wet they can't tell when they're drowning in it.

Posted by: starboardhelm on March 22, 2006 04:56 PM
19. Publisher Miller sounds as if he were on the editorial board of the Wenatchee World, another liberal rag, we get a daily Bush bashing on the editorial pages also Molly Ivan and every other liberal posting. we get George Will as the offsetting conservative, all the news is from the New York Times,Washington Post,L A Times, etc. I canceled my subscription but my wife likes to read the local gossip so she pays the subsciption and I avoid reading it, thank god for the internet.

Posted by: eastern washington on March 22, 2006 08:07 PM
20. This part that you quoted is really funny:
Of course, journalists are different from the general public. We’re not “conservative” like you. That’s because we are skeptical of everyone and everything, particularly those in positions of power. That’s our job.

Just this week the Kitsap Sun showed how far removed from that purported skepticism they are, when they chose to go along with their progressive friends at the regional library and endorse a tax increase proposal they haven't yet seen.

Maybe that's not a liberal bias, but it sure doesn't appear that they are doing their "job" as described by the editor of The Olympian.

Newspaper circulation is declining for the simple reason that their product is so often worthless to people who are inclined to spend the time reading the news to stay informed.

Posted by: Micajah on March 22, 2006 09:13 PM
21. The PI keeps calling here, trying to get us to subscribe. Same with the Bellingham Herald. I keep telling them we aren't interested in unbalanced content, so thanks but no thanks. They still call. Obviously, they are not taking notes of the responses to their sales calls, or they wouldn't bother with us! They choose not to listen, so they aren't going to "get" it.

Posted by: Peggy U on March 23, 2006 10:02 AM
22. Peggy, aren't you on the no-call list? www.donotcall.gov/

Posted by: Rob R on April 5, 2006 11:25 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?