After seven months since her last press conference in
December, Hillary Clinton appeared before journalists last Friday. As Slate.com
reported, “Clinton spoke at a joint convention
being held by the National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ) and the
National Association of Hispanic Journalists (NAHJ).” This lengthy hiatus has
brought heavy criticism from
Donald Trump’s campaign, and even from the mainstream media.
Clinton held what many called a press conference in
Washington, DC, last Friday that was open only to members of the NABJ and NAHJ
– two ethnic groups that are generally friendly to her – according to a press
release for the event. “It is notable that Democratic presidential nominee
Hillary Clinton has recognized the 2016 NABJ-NAHJ Convention as a vital
gathering to discuss her platform and the issues impacting black and Latino
communities,” said NABJ President Sarah Glover in the news release.
While the Slate piece was
generally not complimentary of the responses Clinton gave to questions from the
journalists, it did not mention the positive reaction she received to campaign positions
prior to the question/answer period. Slate suggested the questions were
submitted in advance for approval. A campaign appearance at a minority
journalist organizations’ convention, with attendance limited only to members
of those organizations, does not a press conference make.
It isn’t difficult to understand why Clinton, or any
candidate, would want to speak at such an event, but it is fair to ask why
objective journalists of any description would allow that, let alone invite it.
The Media Research Center outlined the fondness of CNN’s
“New Day” for Donald Trump issues over the issues surrounding Iran and the
payment of $400 million in possible ransom money for four hostages held by the
Islamic nation. MRC’s Newsbusters.org detailed the allotment of time on the two
topics: “CNN set aside nearly half of its air
time on Wednesday's “New Day” to
various recent controversies involving the Trump campaign — 1 hour, 24 minutes, and 18 seconds over three
hours. By contrast, the program clearly didn't think much of the Wall
Street Journal's Tuesday revelation that the Obama administration
secretly airlifted $400 million in cash to Iran. John Berman gave a 27-second news brief to the
report, but didn't mention that the payment was sent on ‘an unmarked cargo
plane.’ ‘New Day,’ therefore, devoted over 187 times more coverage to
Trump than to the millions to Iran.”
No matter what you believe
about the Iran hostage release and potential ransom payment, no matter what
actually transpired, the utter clumsiness of making a payment for any purpose
that way on that date warrants more than a half-minute in a three-hour program
that spent 84 minutes on the Trump issues.
All major media organizations spent hours of broadcast time and
dozens of printed pages on the Republican and Democrat nominating conventions. At
each of these events one speaker addressed the delegates about the loss of a
child.
At the Republican convention the mother of Sean Smith, one
of the four American heroes killed in the terrorist attack on the U.S.
Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, spoke movingly about losing her son, and laid
responsibility for it at the feet of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Pat Smith also noted that when her son’s body was brought home, Clinton “looked
me squarely in the eye and told me a video was responsible.”
The following week at the Democrat convention Khizr Kahn and
his wife Ghazala appeared and Mr. Kahn talked about the death of his son,
Marine Capt. Humayun Khan, who died in Iraq heroically protecting his men. Kahn
described himself and his wife as “patriotic American Muslims, with undivided
loyalty to our country.” He then criticized Donald Trump for his comments about
Muslims, and said, “You have sacrificed nothing and no one.” Predictably,
Kahn’s comments about Trump triggered a response.
“While all the grieving
parents deserve sympathy, the Big Three (ABC, CBS, NBC) network evening and
morning shows seemed to only care about the parents that showed up at the
Democratic Convention,” Newsbusters.org reported. “Khizr Khan and his wife Ghazala’s
DNC appearance earned 55 minutes, 13 seconds of Big Three network coverage,
nearly 50 times more than Pat Smith, whose RNC speech honoring her son earned
just 70 seconds of airtime.”
The First Amendment protects free speech, and that includes
newspapers, television and radio news operations; they are free to say what
they like, bound generally by the same restrictions as individuals. The
difference is that the public depends upon media sources for information upon
which people base important decisions, such as deciding whom to elect to
important positions.
Therefore, news organizations have a solemn duty to provide
balance to the news they cover and how they cover it, and news journalists – as
distinguished from opinion journalists – should be proscribed from injecting
bias and opinion into their work.
These recent examples show decision-making by journalistic
organizations in selecting a convention speaker that raises questions about objectivity,
and a clear, undeniable lack of balance in reporting on important events that
Americans will use in deciding their choice for the presidency and other
offices.
Surely the U.S. media can do better than this.
4 comments:
It is the same over here. Trump say the slightest thing and headlines are made and the only time we hear about Clinton is when she is bagging Trump.
I read something about your media preferring Hillary to Trump. There is no honor among news journalists in the U.S. these days, and apparently other places, as well.
I do not understand the bias
Somewhere along the way, the people who report the news missed the idea that reporters and news organizations have the job and duty to tell the public the what, who, when, where and why objectively and accurately, not to take sides. The news industry in the U.S. is largely corrupt and many/most of those who work in it are unworthy of the trust they have been entrusted with. It's a sad commentary not only on journalism as a profession, but on the ideals upon which the U.S. was founded.
Post a Comment