And so it begins (pt. 2)Posted: November 9, 2008
Ladies and gentlemen – the press elected Obama:
The Post provided a lot of good campaign coverage, but readers have been consistently critical of the lack of probing issues coverage and what they saw as a tilt toward Democrat Barack Obama. My surveys, which ended on Election Day, show that they are right on both counts.
I’m not sure what this part has to do with anything:
The op-ed page ran far more laudatory opinion pieces on Obama, 32, than on Sen. John McCain, 13. There were far more negative pieces about McCain, 58, than there were about Obama, 32, and Obama got the editorial board’s endorsement. The Post has several conservative columnists, but not all were gung-ho about McCain.
Being that the purpose of the “opinion” page is to express opinion. Not provide some sort of “balance” – whatever that means – by balancing the number of times they criticize candidates. I know that I only worked for a college newspaper – and rather poorly at that – but as I understand at it the opinion pages is where writers are supposed voice they take on issues, ideally it is the part of the paper where those – supposed – journalistic “ideals” of “objectivity” and “balance” don’t have to hold.
Again, I could be wrong – I don’t work for the Washington Post.
SEE ALSO: The incredibly frustrating profile on the campaign for a full throated articulation of the “press elected Obama” meme.