Media Bias at the Toledo Blade (UPDATED)
Had an interesting e-mail exchange this week.
FROM: Allen
TO: Ombudsman, Toledo Blade, Toledo, OH
SUBJECT: Newsworthiness of Wurzelbacher’s plumbing license status
DATE: Thu, Oct 16, 2008
Dear Sir:
Regarding your piece on the Blade’s website, “‘Joe the Plumber’ isn’t licensed,” I do not understand the newsworthiness of the story.
I am not a regular reader of the Blade, as I live in the Seattle, WA area and have never visited Toledo. I only learned of your story via the Politico website. Your story mentioned Mr. Wurzelbacher’s license status and the response to it from a local union leader, Mr. Joseph. I can think of no reason why these items are relevant to either Mr. Wurzelbacher’s question, Senator Obama’s response to it, or the larger public response to their dialogue except to discredit Mr. Wurzelbacher.
Similarly, your story said, “Questions were raised Thursday morning whether Mr. Wurzelbacher is a registered voter.” Leaving aside the grammatical question of this use of the passive voice, two questions arise from such a statement.
- Who raised the questions?
- What difference does it make if he’s registered or not?
Regardless of Mr. Wurzelbacher’s voter status, his question of Senator Obama is still valid, and any voting entrepreneur might want an answer to it. Your failure to indicate who is raising questions about his voting status could lead to a number of implications:
- The questions are being raised by the Blade staff.
- The questions are being raised by a person or persons who have a stake in the election, for example, members of the Obama campaign staff.
In either case, the fact that the questioner is hidden implies some kind of bias on behalf of the Blade.
I do not care to throw around accusations of media bias lightly, so if you have an explanation of the newsworthiness of your reporting, I would be delighted to hear it.
Thank you,
Allen McPheeters
Lynnwood, WA
FROM: Ombudsman, Toledo Blade
TO: Allen
SUBJECT: Re: Newsworthiness of Wurzelbacher’s plumbing license status
DATE: Fri, Oct 17, 2008
Joe the Plumber chose to make himself a public figure, so he was fair game. Exposing him was good and responsible journalism and I am VERY proud of The Blade for having done so.
FROM: Allen
TO: Ombudsman, Toledo Blade
SUBJECT: Re: Newsworthiness of Wurzelbacher’s plumbing license status
DATE: Fri, Oct 17, 2008
I’m a little unclear here:
- Is it your assertion that asking a question of a Presidential candidate makes one a public figure?
- Would the Toledo Blade run such a background check on, for example, every participant in a town-hall presidential debate, should one be held in the Toledo area?
- “Exposing” is a telling word here, generally used for in the context of corruption or malfeasance on the part of public officials. What do you think has been accomplished by exposing Mr. Wurzelbacher?
Respectfully yours,
Allen McPheeters
Lynnwood, WA
FROM: Ombudsman, Toledo Blade
TO: Allen
SUBJECT: Re: Newsworthiness of Wurzelbacher’s plumbing license status
DATE: Fri, Oct 17, 2008
he has been shown to be a fraud. he courted press attention; had press conferences, reveled in his new-found celebrity. John McCain, with the same ready-fire-aim attitude that has disgraced so much of his campaign, started citing him without checking him out.Joe the Plumber isn’t a plumber, but a tax dodger. The newspaper exposed the truth, which is what good newspapers do.
FROM: Allen
TO: Ombudsman, Toledo Blade
SUBJECT: Newsworthiness of Wurzelbacher’s plumbing license status
DATE: Sun, Oct 19, 2008
Sir:
I believe you are confused about your job, and what “good newspapers” do.
A newspaper’s ombudsman is supposed to be a neutral party between the paper and its readers, carefully considering reader complaints about coverage and explaining the paper’s policies. The New York Times uses a Public Editor who “serves as the readers’ representative.” The Washington Post’s ombudsman “promotes public understanding of the newspaper and journalism.” Your response is certainly not neutral.
In what relevant sense has Wurzelbacher “been shown to be a fraud”? I’ll stipulate that he may not be legally authorized to perform plumbing work in the state of Ohio. Yet his newsworthiness is tied to the question he asked of Senator Obama and the answer he received. If he were advertising for business, and told people he was a licensed plumber, that would constitute fraud. But his dialogue with Senator Obama was not an advertisement of services — it was a question about economic policy.
His question is in regard to the purchase of a small business, and the effects of Senator Obama’s economic plans upon that business. If the business does not currently have annual revenues in the amount of $250000, Wurzelbacher certainly may have a plan to enable it to have such revenues.
I also find it disturbing that, in your previous reply, you described Wurzelbacher as “fair game” and that “exposing him was good and responsible journalism”. It implies that the Blade considers itself a participant in the political contest, rather than a neutral observer and objective reporter.
Good newspapers use their news stories to present relevant facts to their readers and let them make up their own minds. The Blade appears to have a policy of deciding who should be President of the United States, and then producing news stories to support that view.
Thank you for taking the time to respond to my questions,
Allen McPheeters
Lynnwood, WA
FROM: Ombudsman, Toledo Blade
TO: Allen
SUBJECT: Re: Newsworthiness of Wurzelbacher’s plumbing license status
DATE: Sun, Oct 19, 2008
It sounds to me like you are depressed that McCain seems to be losing, and do not like stories that may not help his campaign. Exposing Joe the plumber was responsible journalism, and the paper would have done the same thing had he expressed support for Obama. (Which, if the financial calculations of the experts are correct, he should have.)
