The Sept. 5 Chicago Tribune featured the following correction (dug up by Steve Allen of the Internet Guild): “In her Wednesday Commentary page column, Linda Bowles stated that President Clinton and his former campaign advisor Dick Morris both were “guilty of callous unfaithfulness to their wives and children.’ Neither man has admitted to being or been proven to have been unfaithful. The Tribune regrets the error.” Hey, what a blooper that was by Linda Bowles! Dick Morris? Unfaithful? Bill Clinton? Unfaithful? Where could anybody get such an idea? Certainly glad the Tribune caught it.
No corrections, however, from the New York Times, whose Political Briefing column last week identified Jesse Helms, en passant, as “one of the most anti-homosexual lawmakers in Congress.” Huh? Is it fair to label opposition to making homosexuals a protected class under federal civil-rights law, or resistance to other policies promoted by gay activists, “anti- homosexual”? Would the Times call a legislator who has voted against the Christian Coalition’s agenda “anti-Christian”?
Two days later, the Times’s Political Briefing began an item on the proposed Parental Rights Amendment on Colorado’s ballot as follows: “Colorado voters appear poised to hand Christian fundamentalists a striking victory.” Fundamentalists? The main sponsor of Parental Rights Amendment efforts around the country, a group called Of the People, is a secular conservative organization. The arguments made on the amendment’s behalf are more often libertarian and populist than “Christian fundamentalist” (whatever that would mean in this context).
Note to Joe Lelyveld: This is what we call, in technical parlance, “media bias.”
