If you're a reporter, especially if you write about politics, people will accuse you of bias. That's just a fact of life. Liberals will say you have a conservative bias, and vice versa.
The best you can hope for is getting the two sides to accuse you of bias in equal measure. I'm proud to say, that seems to be the case with me. I've even registered to vote as an independent, so neither side can accuse me of backing the other's agenda.
Since it will probably become evident sooner or later, however, I may as well admit to one bias. I've always been a sucker for underdog campaigns.
I'm not talking about candidates who are clearly crackpots ("If elected, I would declare Pennsylvania an independent consitutional monarchy!"), nor the ones who have no apparent reason for running other than a desire for attention. I don't see that as asserting your democratic rights, so much as wasting everybody's time.
But when I see candidates clearly fighting uphill battles -- often with no realistic hope of winning -- just because they believe in what they're campaigning for, I can't help it. I get that warm and fuzzy, Jimmy-Stewart-in-"Mr.-Smith-Goes-to-Washington" vibe.
It has nothing to do with political ideology. I feel the same way whether it's Democrats, Republicans, Greens, Libertarians or Ron Paul supporters. (Although even I find the Constitution Party a little unnerving sometimes.)
No, it doesn't skew my coverage. Whether you're a popular incumbent running with the full endorsement and financial backing of your party in a district where you have a clear registration advantage; or a solitary third-party candidate standing on a street corner holding a hand-lettered sign, the materials for which depleted half of your campaign fund, I will give you equal coverage.
The only reason I mention this at all is: 1) I told you folks I'd be honest, and 2) as a lead-in for my next post, regarding the state auditor general race. Read on.
Leave a comment