Politico's Allen: SCOTUS Coverage Shows Media's Left-Of-Center Bias
Politico's Mike Allen let Sonia Sotomayor's SCOTUS nomination sink in for a couple days before settling on this fresh, and provocative analysis.
[T]he media's left-of-center bias is rarely more apparent than during court fights. The coverage running up to the pick was slanted heavily toward the notion of how "pragmatic" Obama's legal views are and how unlikely he was to pick a liberal.
Now we haven't done a sampling survey the way Allen apparently has, but I seem to recall at least a handful of reports about "concern" that Obama's front-runner (and now nominee) might lack the intellectual heft and good manners "necessary" to sit on the Court.
That, of course, was all basically laid to rest by the sorts of experts "concerned" reporters by and large didn't bother to call--a fact that explain why Allen's colleague, Jeanne Cummings reported today that, "[w]ith scant material for direct attacks, some social conservatives are trying to taint Sotomayor by association, namely with Obama."
It's an odd gambit to attack somebody by associating them with resoundingly popular things--but if there isn't much to criticize on the merits, I guess that's all they've got. And, obviously, that's not a sign of "left-of-center bias" either.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
Of course, it's irrelevant that Politico's right-wing operation is, along with Drudge, easily the most dominant force in terms of what stories get covered and what spin gets heard.
Did Jonathan Martin ever get that Pulitzer for his crack reporting on the Ashley Todd tragedy?
May 28, 2009 9:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
The B's for Barack, bitch.
May 28, 2009 10:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
I cut it backwards for your convenience.
May 28, 2009 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
There was a time when Josh Marshall thought every highly of Mike Allen as a journalist. I assume that time has come and gone.
May 28, 2009 9:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bwahahahahaha!!! I love it.
The truth is left-of-center, Mikey-Mike.
May 28, 2009 10:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have long maintained that Allen is a GOP operative. Not just a guy with conservative views, but an actual GOP operative. This statement does nothing to change that opinion.
May 28, 2009 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Allen is one of the most obviously right wing reporters in the MSM. The only others that come close are Ron F. of AP and John Solomon who I think was with AP then WaPo before the Moonie Times picked him up. Allen was particularly good at writing BS hit pieces on Hillary while at the WaPo.
May 28, 2009 10:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Politico makes my eyeballs hurt.
May 28, 2009 10:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
The country is left-of-center. Does that mean the supposed "refs" needs to move the discourse downfield so the right wing can score more points? It's too bad Mike Allen views the media on a left-right spectrum and doesn't see it as authority/status quo/conventional wisdom vs. reform/change/truth.
May 28, 2009 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
right-wing = rich
left-wing = working classes & poor
right-wing = corporations
left-wing = community
right-wing = war for oil
left-wing = peace & progress on alternatives
right-wing = exploiters of mother earth
left-wing = mothering a wounded earth
----
The left-wing bias is towards compassion.
The right-wing sole reason for existence is to preserve and enhance the wealth of the corporate aristocracy.
May 28, 2009 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bingo!
May 28, 2009 10:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well said! Thank you.
May 28, 2009 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Of course it's not as simple as your equal signs. Some liberals are rich. Some conservatives, like many church-goers, are all about community. And unless liberals are all living in Taos Earthships, then we all pollute every time we turn on our lights/computers/ etc. And some conservatives care for the environment. Nothing's ever so black and white.
That said, I'd be happy to start a war for peace and progress on alternatives for oil.
May 28, 2009 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Repeatedly repeating Republican attack points by calling Sotomayor a racist and repeating the "Out of context" quote about being a latina is LEFT WING BIASED?...get real. The media is exposing its ignorance by not doing its homework and continuing to fall at the feet of the racist rightwing pundits and politicians.
May 28, 2009 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
If you ever have any doubt about who Politico's target demographic is, pick a story at random and read the comments.
May 28, 2009 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hoo, boy! You got that right.
May 28, 2009 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, but I'll pass. I left my haz mat gear in the car.
May 28, 2009 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
And the Washington Post. Maybe it's a habit acquired by virtue of my constant blog-reading, but I tend to go to the comments whenever I read an opinion piece. In both publications, the comments are full of the name-calling, reactionary, often racist talking points (not to mention grammatical/spelling errors, logical fallacies galore and general incoherence of thought) that characterize the mouth breathing, Limbaugh-worshiping right.
If that's where the money is, then go for it, Michael. Just don't expect thinking people to take you seriously as a source of objective analysis.
May 28, 2009 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
The hash marks in college football are further apart than in the NFL. This is a none too subtle sign of college liberal extremism and indicative of the biases of the ivory tower. The sportswriters gloss over this, as the NCAA dictates everything about their college football meal ticket. A free society would leave each school to come up with their own rules, recruiting methods and enforcement.
The college football media's left-of-center bias is rarely more apparent than during Heisman Trophy fights. The coverage running up to the pick of Sam Bradford was heavily slanted towards the notion of "pragmatic" issues like how many completions, touchdowns and wins he'd accomplished, while glossing over the obvious fact that he was the first Cherokee to start in Division I at quarterback since Sonny Sixkiller and wears a red and white uniform derived from the colors of the old Soviet communists. Further, as a sophomore, he lacked the kind of record of accomplishment normally expected in a nominee.
May 28, 2009 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
And if I remember correctly Bradford handed the ball off or passed it to players of color on almost 100% of his team's plays. If that isn't prime face evidence of his blatant racism I don't know what is.
May 28, 2009 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can anyone provide a thumbnail review of the ownership of Politico? I must admit I'm ignorant on that score. Thanks in advance.
May 28, 2009 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't have any links right here and can not recall the names off the top of my head but it is one or 2 guys who in the past were active Republican activist/supporters, and I am not talking they happened to give to someone running as a Republican because he was in their Rotary Club.
May 28, 2009 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Its always nice to know how I am way ahead of the curve ..
I commented many times going back several years on how the politico is nothing but a right wing rag.
Of course the msm will use that rag to push the issues because the media is right wing.
Duh!
The problem is and you see it here too is that these sites need commercial ads to stay in business.
Politico long ago figured that out so its bias is now far more obvious as it must respond to its sponsors.
TPM like all the other so called progressive sites respond ONLY to what is being pushed.
They NEVER set the agenda nor do they EVER break a story that is not acceptable to their sponsors.
You will never learn anything new from this site or any commercial site.
I have seen tons of headlines here for ex., wondering about the mass firings of the attorneys general and how rove may have played a part.
But, if this site were not afraid to print the truth you would have seen Greg palest here explaining how it was a payback against those who refused to illegally prosecute so called voter fraud.
That's one example of what I am talking about.
People come here thinking they are informed.
Sad case!
May 28, 2009 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Exceptionally well said and oh so true! One of the best comments ever posted too. The reality is that the right-wing Drudge, Politico and AP always initiate the right-wing stories, usually with stories fed directly to them by Republicans. The rest of the media just regurgitate the stories (even the blatant lies and distortions) putting the Democrats on the defensive. Rarely if ever are there stories that originate from any left leaning organizations that hit the MSM as lead stories.
May 28, 2009 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, it was really tricky to figure that one out. I never would have guessed if you hadn't alerted everyone!
WTH are you talking about? This has been widely reported for years, not just here but even in the MSM.
May 28, 2009 12:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
They NEVER set the agenda nor do they EVER break a story that is not acceptable to their sponsors.
Hilarious!
Never set the agenda? Like the Sestak reporting? The award-winning series on the firings of the Attorneys General?
May 28, 2009 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is this a fake JadeZ (her usual picture isn't there)?
Because this:
"TPM like all the other so called progressive sites respond ONLY to what is being pushed.
They NEVER set the agenda nor do they EVER break a story that is not acceptable to their sponsors.
You will never learn anything new from this site or any commercial site."
Is just wrong. I'm fond of (over)stating that josh and TPM singlehandedly prevented Bush from privatizing Social Security.
May 28, 2009 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Social Security, the Attorney-Generals, Duke Cunningham, so on and so forth.
Even the Grey Lady referenced TPM in the deadtree edition this morning.
May 28, 2009 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
[I know others have responded, but here's my response as well.]
Leaving aside the other arguments for which JadeZ has failed to provide evidence, on May 28, 2009 11:08 AM, JadeZ wrote:
I must echo midnight rambler and say that this is simply not true.
TPMDC didn't exist in that form (and its predecessor, TPMElectionCentral, was relatively new and focused on, well, elections).
TPMMuckraker, however, is covering this aspect of the US Attorney firings extensively, with plenty of original reporting, including a piece by Zachary Roth this May 9 that contains direct conversation with Robert Luskin, Rove's attorney, and a March 6 story by Roth on a voter fraud case that the DOJ dropped.
Visit the TPMMuckraker site, click on SEARCH in the upper right corner of the main page, then type in "voter fraud US attorney".
Palast's reporting has also been the subject of a story once link), "Cage Match: Did Griffin Try to Disenfranchise African-American Voters in 2004?
By Paul Kiel - June 26, 2007, 11:21AM". Josh Marshall mentioned this story on the TPM "front page" (link).
May 28, 2009 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's your left of center bias:
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/
May 28, 2009 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Drudge rocks his world!
Is anything to the left of Rush and Beck and Hannity "left of center?"
May 28, 2009 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh i think Allen and Co are just fox in blog form, and will go the way of the dodo.
TPM and related sites , with marcy from FDL seem to have had more Major items of journalism in the past 24 months then all US media combined.
:P
May 28, 2009 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm perplexed.
The media is left-of-center (I know; don't get me started), and was reporting that Obama would be unlikely to pick a liberal. That's the premise, right?
And have we established that Sotomayor IS a liberal? Haven't we spent the past 8 years talking about how socially conservative the Latino community in the US is? Doesn't the NYTimes have a story in today's paper about concerns that Sotomayor opposes abortion rights?
So what the fuck is the screaming lede on this one?
May 28, 2009 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sotomayor was first named to the federal bench by Bush I, so I think that calling her a liberal only makes sense in the current political environment, where judges who don't actively campaign for segregation in their spare time are called mainstream, and senators who oppose women's rights are "centrist".
May 28, 2009 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
You couldn't have described that NYTimes any better. "Concern," indeed.
May 28, 2009 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Allen's perception that:
"Besides, the media's left-of-center bias is rarely more apparent than during court fights. The coverage running up to the pick was slanted heavily toward the notion of how "pragmatic" Obama's legal views are and how unlikely he was to pick a liberal. "
is kind of weird..he seems to be saying that because they did not 'predict' Obama picking a 'liberal', their own liberal bias is revealed.
ok , Mr.Allen, not going to follow you down that hypothertical rabbit hole. first of all you are dealing with what happened before Sotomayor's selection... could it possibly be that Obama's pick was, in fact pragmatic? and that even conservatives, behind closed doors, acknowledge that?
May 28, 2009 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Mike Allen -- so how's that Barbeque tasting??
May 28, 2009 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Remember, Politico needs to win the morning and the afternoon: Mike Allen doesn't have time to read legal opinions, or even summaries of opinions (at places like SCOTUSblog).
May 28, 2009 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
About a month after Katrina hit, Mike Allen was a guest on C-SPAN's Washington Journal. Just prior to this appearane I read that Bush put Karl Rove
on some committee type group Bush created to ensure contractors were facilitated in what they needed to do in New Orleans.
I opened my comment about Katrina and the committee, and as soon as I mentioned Karl Rove, Allen jumped in to babble that too many people want to blame Karl Rove for all the evil in the world. He babbled in defense of Rove for another 30 seconds or so then he left me finish.
I said I was just going to say that Karl Rove won't be a back bencher on any committee Bush appoints him to, rather, he'll have a lot of influence.
Allen had to agree with me. I've been watching him more closely ever since and I've noticed that more often than not his sympathy for Republicans comes through in his commentary and in his reporting.
May 28, 2009 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
If by "left-of-center" Mike Allen means the constant repetition of rightwing talking points on cable news, well, then, I'd have to agree wholeheartedly with him.
May 28, 2009 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Allen's point is wrong but not ridiculous: As Yglesias points out, Sotomayor's resume is nearly identical to Samuel Alito's. But Alito was much more likely than Sotomayor to be described as an ideological stalwart, and his nomination to be considered controversial and contentious.
But there are three better reasons than ideological bias to explain the divergent treatment of Alito and Sotomayor:
1. Alito was replacing O'Connor, so a greater ideological/partisan shift expected then than Sotomayor replacing Souter (an expectation that was, of course, amply borne out).
2. Alito was also replacing, as nominee, Harriet Miers, whose nomination was withdrawn as much or more due to her unwillingness to commit to a right-wing judicial agenda, as to her lack of qualifications. Alito's nomination, therefore was widely (and fairly) reported as, post-Miers, a capitulation to right-wing pressure groups.
3. Most importantly, Alito is more likely than Sotomayor to be at odds with the current state of the law. That that settled state, a legacy of the mid-century Dem juggernaut, from FDR to Johnson, is arguably left of the current center really enter into it. From a judicial standpoint, the center ought to be considered, not contemporary political opinion, but current law and settled precedent, and left/right eccentricity defined in terms of willingness to overturn those laws and precedents.
And Alito is the only one the right has even the sliver of a right to bitch about; John Roberts was basically confirmed by acclamation from the MSM and the Dem leadership alike (I didn't really complain; he was replacing Rehnquist, and elections have consequences).
May 28, 2009 12:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mikes' momma is left of center.
May 28, 2009 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink