I am fully aware of the presence/purpose of opinion and editorials in the news business.
What I was inferring in my recent e-mail to you was, how does "objective journalism" insert itself actively into the political arena and still assure people that the politically-charged articles in the rest of the paper are, in fact, not similarly biased? One certainty in the issue is that our political representatives are actually elected by their constituents, and tend to reflect the majority that put them in office.
Not so with newspaper editors.
Yet, for some reason, the mainstream media has felt it their duty and civic obligation to take a personal position on many controversial social/political issues, as if their readers/viewers cannot make appropriate decisions on their own regarding these issues, simply by being presented with the unvarnished facts.
As I have often written to EditorandPublisher.com, is it little wonder that print media is in a downward spiral, daily trying to maintain some financial viability so that they can continue to perform in their historical role as the Fourth Estate? Certainly, there are many factors affecting this trend beyond people disagreeing with the socio/political bent of a particular news editor.
But there must also be some acceptance of the reality that many Americans have an even lower opinion of the mainstream media than they do of politicians. Few in the industry honestly ask why.
On a personal note, I served for a time in the capacity of Public Information Officer for the fire department where I spent my 29-year career. It was during that close association with journalists (electronic and print) that my negative opinions were formed and remain to this day.
I will not go through all the falsefications I personally witnessed and the skewing of the facts that were freely available. I even witnessed it, in spades, while working the bombing site of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City 12 years ago, while in the capacity of a Rescue Team Manager for FEMA.
I know I will be accused of painting with too broad a brush and will certainly accept that criticism. But I have had little reason to alter that view in the intervening years. Even here in beautiful Rim Country.
So when you get these types of letters, please appreciate that you are hearing from another person who believes their opinion is just as valid as yours. The frustration comes from the absence of an equally weighted "bully pulpit" available to us little people.
Ron Hamric, Pine