After Week of Big Political News, the Big Loser? Liberal Bias

October 10, 2012, 3:48 pm

By DAVID CARR

Back when Barack Obama seemed to be in command of the race and had the poll numbers to back it up - that was just a week ago, wasn't it? - there were abundant suggestions that the fix was in, that a compliant, genetically liberal media was smoothing the way for the re-election fo the Democratic incumbent. Rep. Paul Ryan complained on Fox News Sunday about liberal bias, various conservatives signed a letter suggesting that coverage of the race had been corrupted by a pro-Obama media agenda, and there were even charges that the polls themselves were skewed by political motives.

Ben Smith, editor of Buzzfeed, said simple political thermodynamics were at work. When the numbers aren't working for a campaign, the campaign tends to blame the data rather than the message.

“The side that's losing typically gets obsessed with unskewing the polls, and maybe it was Mitt Romney's long, long time spent losing that made it so extreme this cycle.”

But after a remarkable performance by Mitt Romney in last week's debate and a remarkably bad one by the incumbent, a poll by the Pew Research Center showed that Mr. Romney had not only made up ground, but was four points ahead of President Barack Obama among likely voters. (And a Gallup poll seemed to support the notion that Mr. Romney was surging.)

So, did the mainstreamâ€" and allegedly liberal - media attempt to knock down the new numbers? Hardly. Most reveled in the turn of events because reporters, regardless of their own political affiliations, are always in favor of news. In stories all over the newsstand and the web, Romney “Galloped” to a lead, Democrats were “demoralized” as Mr. Obama' s edge was “erased” and Mr. Romney “surged.”

Keyboards clacked and adjectives flew because the poll numbers signaled that the last month of the campaign, which had been looking a bit dreary, was going to be a horserace and reporters headed to the rail with renewed enthusiasm. As Joseph Weisenthal, the Business Insider writer and tweet machine known as @TheStalwart, put it, “If you know want to know the big bias in media (of which I am guilty) it's storyline bias.” The headlines reflected not disappointment, but excitement that the game was on.

Slate “Was Romney's Debate Win the Most Convincing in History? It Looks That Way”

The Los Angeles Times: “Romney won debate and, more importantly, the media narrative”

The New York Times: “Romney Erases Obama's Convention Bounce in Forecast”

MSNBC: “Romney sprinting into the lead”

Reuters: “U.S. presidential race now a dog fight as Romney surges”

I sent e-mails to a few people involved in campaign coverage asking whether the charge of liberal bias was overstated. Tucker Carlson, the founder of The Daily Caller said that liberal bias hasn't gone away, it's just been drowned out by a convincing Romney victory in the debate.

“The lesson is that the press doesn't control poll results. It's possible to get elected even if the media are rooting for your opponent, as both Reagan and George W. Bush proved.

It's also true that reporters get bored with the existing storyline, which until last week was that Romney had already lost. So they welcome a chance to talk about something else.

But none of this proves there's no bias. I don't think any fair person who has watched carefully could claim Romney and Obama have been held to the same standard by the press. They haven't.”

Reporter like, desire and concoct action, anything that makes them feel like they are in the middle of something large and elections brings out both the most craven and noble aspects of that imperative. The nobler component reflects an understanding that picking the people in charge matters a great deal. But it's often craven in execution because journalists will turn any crack in a campaign into a chasm and a slip in the numbers into a spiral. It creates not only the illusion of movement, but of relevance. Matt Labash, a writer for the Weekly Standard, explained as much.

“I think what campaign journalists, conservative or liberal, always crave more than actual fairness, are twists. Then, each side gets its turn to whine about something. Which is fairness once removed, I suppose.

As for polls, these kinds of swings give journos an important opportunity to entertain themselves by analyzing what undecideds, who can't seem to make up their minds after two solid years of campaigning by both sides think at the precise moment of a fleeting news cycle that will likely become obsolete seconds after the clueless swing voter hangs up the phone with their pollster.

Then of course, once swing voters read about how they've changed their minds, they will only be further confused, thus providing a perfect and endless feedback loop of uncertainty and drama which will need to be further interpreted by the media, thus making us feel relevant, even as our industry is dying.”

This election has made clear, as in Hollywood, nobody knows anything. But if the media is putting a thumb on the scale, its usually one that points toward anything more exciting than what they are already covering.