The Macro
The email I received this morning was not unique in any way. In fact, you can bet anytime I write a column, an aggrieved reader will send me something like this:
“A little biased, again, no?”
The email was accompanied by a photo of two-and-a-half paragraphs of my column this morning on the NDP’s curious strategy of starting its election campaign a full month before the official campaign is scheduled to begin.
The offending paragraphs described the “reward” part of the “risk-reward equation” I described in the column. In short, it noted that if the NDP had hoped to catch the Progressive Conservatives and Liberals off-guard, it largely worked. The NDP had dominated the political agenda in the province in August, with the Tories and Liberals struggling to get coverage in news media.
Although I will applaud the author’s brevity, the individual (there was no name attached to the email) clearly made two mistakes in the allegation of bias.
First, the text of the email and photo cleverly excluded the part of my column that detailed the “risk” part of the equation: that the NDP would run out of things to say, or that it’s early announcements would be largely forgotten by election day. My conclusion in the column was that I don’t know enough about the Tory and Liberal campaigns to say whether this strategy will work.
The second mistake the email writer made was misunderstanding the concept of bias. So, as a way of helping this reader and others who might make the same mistake, here is my first pillar of This Idiot’s Guide to Bias: we’re all biased.
I’m biased because I think that the Tories and Liberals were caught flat-footed by the NDP strategy. I’m also biased I suppose because I don’t accept at face value that the NDP strategy will work. The fact is that there is no such thing as unbiased news reporting. Just as there is no way to live your life without bias.
Choose a bagel over bread for your toast? Bias. Coffee instead of tea? Bias. Read Fox News online instead of the New York Times, or vice versa? Very clear political bias. If we’re going to have a political debate, let’s not get lost in the weeds of erroneous definitions of bias; let’s just assume we have them and move on.
Which brings me to the second pillar of This Idiot’s Guide to Bias: being biased is not the same as being partisan.
The author clearly thinks that I have a partisan affinity for the NDP. I can safely assure them, and you, that I don’t have a political party of choice. There are things that all parties do that are worthy of my support in a column; just as there are many things worthy of my criticism. In my humble but biased opinion.
Like most journalists — at least, those that toil for legitimate news organizations — I don’t have a horse in this race. My great hope for the outcome is that the election is competitive, that voters have clear and unambiguous choices, and that the parties campaign in an intellectually honest manner.
Beyond that, the only thing I’m certain about is that I will be writing a lot about the members of the governing party and trying to hold their feet to the fire.
Third brief point about bias in The Idiot’s Guide: your bias is defensible if it’s fair and factual.
It’s been said we’re all entitled our own opinion (where our biases become evident) but we are not entitled to our own facts. Criticizing a political leader or party just because they are not your political leader or party is unfair and unsubstantiated bias.
Which brings me to my last point in This Idiot’s Guide to Bias: if we use the word correctly and stop trying to fabricate conspiracy theories based on erroneous definitions, we can have a respectful discourse.
Many of my readers know that if you come at me respectfully with a counterpoint to any of my columns, I will engage. Sometimes, I’m a bit embarrassed at how much I engage but the imperative for me is to respond respectfully to anyone who has a legitimate and respectful point to make.
If you start by accusing any journalist of bias, in an awkward and erroneous way of alleging they have a partisan affiliation or leaning, then you’re not worthy to engage with a working journalist.
Own your bias and I’ll own mine. If something doesn’t make sense, or you don’t think I’m being fair, you can make that point without trying to construct some fantasy about partisan leanings.
That’s an open invitation to anyone who wants to discuss or even debate election issues. And a request to those who don’t understand bias, or acknowledge their own bias, to save your effort and my time by not reaching out.
Happy election to all.
|
