30 Comments - corvax - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 9:49 am: as among the most informed possible voters, of course they should vote. as journalists (v commentators) they should STFU about whom they voted for - Jacques Strappe - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 9:57 am: If they’re smart they won’t vote in primaries. All they need are party hacks (either Dem or Repub) looking through voter registration records to try to make hay with it. Best to avoid the appearance, etc. - Lula May - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 10:01 am: I see no reason why they shouldn’t vote. We already know they are partisan. The real question is: if they make a political donation should they be allowed to report on the candidate they contributed to ? Or should this information be reported up front. Example: I fully support this candidate with my financial contribution therefore anything you read here is probably slanted in favor of my candidate. - Wumpus - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 10:03 am: It is their right to vote, do not give that up. Donating money is another issue (possibly). - Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 10:11 am: There was a great story not too long ago that showed that the bias in the media has nothing to do with the individual biases of reporters. The bias in the media reflects the biases and attitudes of the market they are trying to reach and/or hold on to. Case in point: In the wake of 9/11, when America was in full-throated blood lust, you would have been hard-pressed to find any paper that wasn’t slanted in favor of invading Iraq. Now that the war is so unpopular, even the most Conservative papers seem to be biased against it. I suspect that the market bias of the media has become even more pronounced as the media business has become even more competitive. - ZC - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 10:13 am: It should be up to the individual journalists. They are still American citizens. They don’t (or shouldn’t) have to give up their fundamental rights to the ballot because of their profession. Those that vote may get some flack from stupid pols and party hacks, but if they’re willing to put up with that setback, and they’re smart and hard-working, the strength of their coverage should ultimately set those fears to rest. Intelligent observers will notice whether a journalist writes the same way he / she votes. I wonder if there are news organizations in Illinois that prohibit their resporters from pulling a partisan ballot. That would be an interesting lawsuit, but I gotta think the journalist would prevail. - Cap'n Crud - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 10:21 am: Yes, they should feel free to vote in primaries, although Mr Strappe makes a good point about the inherent risk they run. We really oughta have primaries in which voters do not have to declare for one party only, and can cross over to vote for candidates from either party. Donating $$ to candidates does seem a bit too far for media-types to go. The line should be drawn between voting and donating. - i d - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 10:27 am: They should be able to vote and to donate; they are citizens. People should be responsible and not rely on one journalist or one source for news. However, organizations giving large amounts of money to politicians should not be rewarded with government contracts. - VanillaMan - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 10:34 am: They are citizens, and hold the franchise. The failure here is within the news organizations that are unable to present balanced views. Everyone has bias. The problem shown has been the overwhelming bias currently within journalism. I am happy the mask if off. I want everyone to know that their favority news source has few connections to reality. I want these guys to vote. I am just tired of their weighted advantages in warping our concepts of the news. - VanillaMan - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 10:44 am: Gee YDD, after your insightful postings today, I thought you were on a roll. But what gives? “Case in point: In the wake of 9/11, when America was in full-throated blood lust, you would have been hard-pressed to find any paper that wasn’t slanted in favor of invading Iraq. Now that the war is so unpopular, even the most Conservative papers seem to be biased against it.” “Blood lust”? “slanted”? If you want to make a case in point you might want to try presenting it in a way that doesn’t make the other view look so delusional, ignorant and stupid. There was very little blood lust as you put it. There was very little talk at that time about invading Iraq - we knocked off the Taliban first, remember? It took almost two years of working with the UN and using diplomatic resources before everyone gave up with Hussein, including the UN and the majority of Democrats in Congress. To claim we were full of some kind of desire to shed blood in Iraq after 9/11 is not presenting the facts correctly. But such is bias, isn’t it? - Pot Stirrer - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 10:46 am: In the financial markets the analysts and reporters normally are required to provide full disclosure. Why not the reporters? There is as much at stake I would think with the future of the country’s directions as there is in the financial markets. - the wonderboy - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 10:50 am: May get a little off topic from the question… Simple answer, yes they should vote. If members of the media don’t vote, how can they possibly lecture the rest of the country about low turnout? For starters, they should certainly vote in primary elections…and this is just evidence as to why we should rethink our voting process. In reality we should have open primaries which do not require voters to declare a party. Next, we should look at utilizing an Australian ballot which is truly secret…our system makes it too easy to tie voters to votes. As for the money issue, I am actually surprised that employers haven’t been challenged in trying to enforce policies which ban campaign donations. In Buckley v. Valeo, the Supreme Court clearly stated that campaign donations are part of protected free speech. Especially in an industry which cries out when free speech is limited, banning such donations seems hypocritical and counterproductive. I’m not saying that we don’t need reform, but this seems a little ridiculous coming from the world of journalism. - SIL MS - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 11:15 am: As a journalist, I can tell you that any political bias I may have is soundly quashed by the political bias of my publisher and general manager. In our region my own political leanings are no secret, as I took a year off from journalism to run a campaign and I know that my writing is held under a microscope because of this. Unless I’m writing an editorial, it’s my job to present both sides of an issue equally and allow my readers to hopefully make their decision based upon the facts. (yeah right) As far as who I give money to? I’m a journalist, I have no money to give! - Mr. Luxury Yacht - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 11:17 am: A friend who teaches journalism at Columbia College said she and her husband haven’t voted in years for exactly this reason. She also said she realizes that within their profession it’s probably viewed as quaint at this point. - Plutocrat03 - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 11:40 am: Vote certainly, donate perhaps…. The important part is that there are enough reporters out there so that the editors of the ‘responsible,’filtered’ media should be able to find a reporter who does not have a favorite candidate/party to push for in a contest. There is nothing worse than having an expectation of an unbiased story and learning along the way that a reporter has a position. I thinke the papers, radio and TV have forgotten that at one time they had a job to convey factual information. It appears now that they percieve their job to be to persuade the readers/viewers to their postition while pretending to be unbiased. Does that make the editor’s job harder, you bet. Otherwise we can all log in to our favorite blogs and read what the admittedly biased writers say. If one listens to the Frankens or the Savages of the world, we do know where they are coming from. That is a better alternative to deception - HoosierDaddy - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 11:40 am: Of course they should vote. With a few exceptions, the “political hacks” like me, already know the political bent of reporters from their work and from interaction with them. Might as well be up front with it. Did anybody hear about the MSNBC poll of their own news people that showed that 90 percent of them who participate in politics are Democrat campaign donors? It’s a part of being a citizen. News reporting and commentary have never, and can never be unbiased. Let’s stop pretending. Reporters should do the best job they can in reporting facts in context, and the public should accept that every human being sees things through his or her own eyes, with his or her own “filters.” I think that we are probably better off knowing what those filters are. As a general rule, I think most TV and newspaper reporters are liberal and talk radio and Fox News guys are conservative. Might was well be upfront about it. - The Horse - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 12:14 pm: of course they should vote.. We dont require intelligence tests. - Number 8 - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 12:43 pm: They shouls vote, but only if they write in Rich Miller for every office. - qcexaminer - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 1:10 pm: Of course journalists should be able to vote in all elections and contribute to any political cause or campaign they wish. But journalists should be subject to the same transparency and accountabilitydemands they place on politicians and business. Otherwise, they are just hypocrites who say “do as we say, not as we do”. Freedom for journalists! (And accountability) - Latham Place - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 1:11 pm: They should be entitled to vote in every election just like every other citizen. If they become partisan with their work/journalism/reporting, etc. let their employer handle the situation and reprimand them appropriately. - Ed at ICJL - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 1:41 pm: Of course journalists have the right and responsibility to vote. Primary elections present a problem for reporters covering a race. Regardless of which party primary the reporter votes in, he/she is creating a fairness/bias issue that may not be publicly acknowledged but it will be there. “Oh, he/she is a Republican, so what do you expect?” or “Oh, he/she is a Democrat, so what do you expect?” - Belle - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 2:03 pm: Of course they should vote. I don’t even care if they give money to politicians or parties. Their job is to be unbiased and factual, a verified fact that is. The last thing the U.S. needs is a bunch of whiny ass reports running around screaming about their equal rights as American citizens and how the pen is mightier than the sword and blah blah blah. Smile its FRIDAY!! - Chris - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 3:13 pm: Absolutely political reporters should be voting in primaries. First of all, they are taxpayers like the rest of us. Secondly, few of us get as familiar with the candidates and their different approaches to the many issues we face, it would be a shame if some of the most educated voters, many of whom are trying to convince us that our votes matter, don’t participate because someone believes that non-participation is equivalent to impartiality. If I have a problem with the partisanship of any given reporter, I’ll just stop reading that persons coverage. I have already sworn off CNN/Washington Post for ignoring Biden and Richardson, probably the two most qualified, in favor of jumping on the Obamawagon, perhaps the least qualified. I don’t mind press giving attention to Obama, but fair and balanced the press has not been. - Levois - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 4:21 pm: I don’t care they can’t vote in partisan primaries if they want. They’re citizens and I’m sure some of them get sick of the partisanship. If they do then I imagine they’ll be better political reporters. - Independent One - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 4:34 pm: Let them zip their lips on their favorites, but no one should tell them to not vote. Maybe they are as sick and tired of our politicians not doing much of anything but collecting some mighty fine paychecks as I am. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 4:37 pm: VanillaMan - In case you’ve forgotten, the main argument advanced by the administration for invading Iraq was that Saddam Hussein was somehow responsible for 9/11. If that ain’t “blood lust”, I don’t know what is. And while this is a little off topic, back in 1994, when Rick Winkel first ran for the Illinois House, the Champaign News Gazette cut him a check for $10,000. Nowhere in their editorial endorsing him did they mention their fat check. THAT, I’ve got a problem with. - Dollar USA - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 4:51 pm: They should vote and make contributions if they are permitted by their employer. Just keep the bias out of their reporting. - The Conservative - Friday, Jun 22, 07 @ 5:50 pm: They have every right to vote and should vote. They can say who they are for and work for that candidate. The line comes when they don’t say this is my idea and this is fact. - The Federalist - Saturday, Jun 23, 07 @ 2:24 pm: When was the last time you cared what a “journalist” thought or said? Rather, Couric etc.. Let them vote and donate just like we do because in the federal and state legislative bodies no one cares what we think either. - Bill Baar - Saturday, Jun 23, 07 @ 7:22 pm: They should vote. But they should quit sounding so phoney about their objectivity. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.