Unequal coverage: Media fail to serve the needs of voters

Never in the history of this great nation has the national news media been so overly biased in favor of one presidential candidate. Sen. Barack Obama is clearly getting highly favored treatment from the national media -- in all forms -- and that is establishing a pattern that should be concerning to every American.

Obama decides to travel to the Mideast this week and anchors for all three major networks pack their bags and tag along. Sen. John McCain undertook an identical trip recently and not one anchor made the trip.

Sen. Obama pens an editorial in The New York Times last week outlining his position on the war, but this week the Times rejects a response from Senator McCain. And that is just the beginning.

It's no wonder that talk radio and Fox News are enjoying the popularity in terms of ratings. They have become the voices heard outside of the urban media and the American people yearn for those voices.

You want to know what we can do about this outlandish bias? Not one darned thing. Sure, we can complain and moan and write letters and sign petitions. And absolutely nothing will come of it. We are forced to accept that the impartial national media has gone the way of the dinosaur.

As a journalist -- albeit on a far smaller scale and in a far smaller stadium -- I recognize that bias is part of this business. We're no different than others. We have opinions, too. And like it or not, we allow our opinions to trump differing views. But when we exclude differing views we cross a dangerous line. The American public may be dumb but they are not stupid. They recognize this slant for what it is.

If you examine the history of political coverage in the media -- and believe me, I have -- you will always without exception find favoritism toward one candidate. The reality is it's virtually impossible not to lean in one direction without allowing those sentiments to creep into coverage. But what we're experiencing in this political season is the favoritism of one candidate to the complete exclusion of the other. That is a far different cry from past practices, and it does not bode well for our society, much less the media industry.

People yearn for truth. They yearn for information. And it's the media's job and responsibility to provide both of those ingredients. But the slanted bias that we are witnessing from the national media -- both print and broadcast -- is an embarrassment to a free and open society.

If fully exposed, the luster will quickly tarnish from the Obama facade. His constant flip-flops and his thin resume will make the American public more clearly examine where he will take this country. But we may not be allowed to see within that exterior if the national media continues their path toward his coronation.

I have never been a cheerleader for Senator McCain. Yet, unless given full reporting of both candidates' positions, their failings and their vision for this country, I cannot make an informed decision on what path I believe this country should travel. The national media have clearly conspired to set the agenda according to their views and have decided it best we know little about the shortcomings of Senator Obama and less about Senator McCain.

In the world of journalism, sometimes it's important what you say about a candidate and sometimes it's important what you don't say. The national media has decided to spoon-feed us the best of Obama and nothing from McCain.

When you limit my choices, you limit my future.

Michael Jensen is a Southeast Missourian columnist and publisher of the Standard Democrat in Sikeston, Mo.