Tierney: J-schools Guilty of 'Cronyism'

Just in time for our discussion about Bernard Goldberg's "Bias" comes John Tierney's latest New York Times column about the prevailing liberal ideology in the nation's J-schools (and law schools). Writing about the composition of the faculties at such schools, the libertarian Tierney wrote:

Only one journalism school, the University of Kansas, had a preponderance of Republicans (by 10 to 8). ...The ratio was 4 to 1 at Northwestern and New York University, 13 to 1 at the University of Southern California, 15 to 1 at Columbia. Some academics argue that their political ideologies don't affect the way they teach, which to me is proof of how detached they've become from reality in their monocultures.

In this environment, Tierney claims, young conservatives and libertarians "have simply given up on the traditional media either as a source of news or as a place to work."

If true, it's a serious problem that needs to be addressed. After all, in a recent Pew poll , conservatives account for one-third of the U.S. population, and with the amount of other media options available in this environment, news organizations can't afford to lose such a large portion of their audience.

But what, if anything, can be done to make schools and the media more representative of the country they represent? Tierney, ever the libertarian, doesn't believe any outside intervention is necessary, saying that "this is one of those many problems that doesn't require a solution by the government." Likewise, liberals, like Eric Alterman, author of the next book on our class' reading list, "What Liberal Media?", would argue that liberal bias by the media is overrated and doesn't need to be addressed. So what's the solution?

I, like most who have commented on the issue, don't have the foggiest idea how to fix the problem. But, for entertainment value, it sure would be fun to see liberal schools like our own institute an affirmative action policy to put more conservatives on their faculty. It's a solution no one would embrace.

Christie Rizk @ October 11, 2005 - 4:16pm

I was going to do a post on this column, but since you beat me to it, what I was going to say is that there are probably a preponderance of liberals in the media, or in J-schools, because we tend to be more open-minded, and willing to see things other people's way. Conservatives tend to see things in black and white, when life is really shades of gray. Since it's harder to classify news in a conservative manner - except if you work for FOX - coservatives tend to shy away from the profession.

I apologize if any of you are conservatives/Republicans and don't feel the way I described. I was, of course, speaking in generalities.

Ryan McConnell @ October 11, 2005 - 5:18pm

Tierney addressed the self-selection issue, too, writing, "Journalism attracts people who want to right wrongs..." I agree; I think it's natural for some professions to attract a particular "type" of person. No one complains when professions like financial analysts or accountants are filled with conservatives. It's just that the product journalism produces is both visible and far more influential than other fields, thus making it an easy mark.

Still, that doesn't mean that those charging liberal bias don't have a point. As much as journalists and J-school students would like to pretend otherwise, it's naive to believe that our ideology and perspective don't influence our work in at least some subtle way.

Christie Rizk @ October 11, 2005 - 7:13pm

I never said that our biases - whatever they may be - don't influence our work. In fact, my point was that we are in this profession precisely because of our biases. Whether that is a good or bad thing is a matter of opinion.

Erica Martinson @ October 11, 2005 - 7:03pm

"We tend to be more open-minded, and willing to see things other people's way. Conservatives tend to see things in black and white, when life is really shades of gray." I think, Christie, that statements like this are an on point example of the problems of liberal bias in the media. One of the things I've bemoaned learning in my life is that Conservatives are people too. Most of them, save maybe Rush Limbaugh, understand that issues in politics and the world are widely varied. Those who are at the farthest ends of the spectrum, liberal or conservative, see the world in right and wrong, black and white. They just have opposite ideas about what those are. Everyone else in the middle just want the best for their world, but have different opinions about how to get there.

I've been amazed to find the singularity of political opinion that floats around the journalism community. More so, I'm amazed at how much people assume that it's a standard. It's a standard at the large metro papers, that, because of their size and consequential ability, have a greater influence in this world. They reflect the ideologies of their locations, and that's not surprising. There are a lot of conservative papers out there; Fox News is very popular.

But yes, a grand majority of journalists are liberal. So are PhD's. You have a point, about being open minded, but I think what you mean is that there's a link between an interest in persuit of knowledge and a progressive nature. I think there's also something in the spirit of journalism, let's look to the first amendment, that harkens the fight agains "the man." Journalists are skeptical about large corporations because they are the antithesis of something that is done for the value of truth, and not profit. (Yes, it's ironic, media moguls and all...)

I've strayed, but all I'm saying is that if liberals aren't careful about trying to justify their bias, we'll never solve the problem.

Christie Rizk @ October 11, 2005 - 7:10pm

Erica, I see your point. I realize that conservatives are people too - I apologize if that didn't come through in my comment. However, I'm not so sure that liberals have to justify their bias. Conservatives in the news certainly don't, and I don't think they should have to either. I think the danger comes in when liberals and conservatives both try to pretend that they have no bias, and that it's the "other guy" who's biased. That's where the problem is.

Recent comments

Navigation

Syndicate

Syndicate content