On the 17th of June I wrote the following in 3 Divergent, MSM Views Of Obama's ...,
Over the course of the 16 months I've been blogging every day, I often read about the same event from multiple sources and the differences in the way mainstream, theoretically impartial, unbiased news outlets cover a story has been eye opening. Bottom-line: there is no such thing as objective reporting, everyone has a partisan slant, some just acknowledge and/or are more obvious about it.
So here in, their entirety, are how 3 "legitimate" sources--not partisan blogs but major newspapers spanning the political spectrum from right to left--reported Obama's decision to stop the Federal government's discrimination against gay & lesbian employee benefits.
So what's the truth? Is Obama's decision a break through or an incomplete bone thrown to his supporters? It all depends on which story you read it seems.
This reality struck me again as I read the NY Times' and Boston Globe's coverage of the same story: how Massachusetts, during these times of fiscal stress, is treating legal immigrants' health coverage under its breakthrough plan.
First, the NY Times' dour headline and opening:
Massachusetts Cuts Back Immigrant Health Care
State-subsidized health insurance for 31,000 legal immigrants here will no longer cover dental, hospice or skilled-nursing care under a scaled-back plan that Gov. Deval Patrick announced Monday.
Mr. Patrick said his administration had struggled to find a solution "that preserves the promise of health care reform" after the state legislature cut most of the $130 million it had previously allotted immigrants, to help close a budget deficit. Although their health benefits will be sharply curtailed in some cases, Mr. Patrick portrayed the new program as a victory, saying the services that the affected group tends to use the most will still be covered.
Then the Boston Globe's glass half full view:
Switch saves immigrants’ health care
Thousands of legal immigrants facing steep cuts in state-subsidized health care will keep core medical services such as routine doctor visits and hospital treatment under a plan unveiled yesterday by Governor Deval Patrick.
The initiative, which also includes prescription drugs, mental health services, and emergency care, salvages coverage for 31,000 immigrants considered to be especially vulnerable because of their low income and their status as refugees who have lived in the United States less than five years.
So which is it? Is the Patrick plan a victory or a failure? In my June example, the sources covered the ideological spectrum but here, not only are both newspapers liberal, they're even owned by the same company!
The truth, it seems, all depends on how it is reported. So now we have a partial answer to the age old riddle: if two people are there when the tree falls, it makes two different sounds.
Something for everyone to keep in mind while reading or watching "impartial," "objective" news.