You know how I like to rag on the Courier-Journal editorial board, especially for their pro-River Fields positions on the bridges project, as well as their ofttimes high-school-level taunts of individuals or groups they do not like for whatever reason. Sure, they are generally liberal too, but that doesn't concern me too much, as they as a board have to be biased in a particular way by nature. And their ideological position is frequently balanced by the columnists (many of whom are conservative, such as John David Dyche, and even from the batshit crazy far right wing) whose columns are published in the same forum.

At least the editorial board of the C-J is self-aware that not everyone agrees with their positions.

Apparently this isn't so at The Voice-Tribune, a local newspaper that's been around since 1949 even it was only recently that I had ever heard of it. The paper also says its price is "$1.00" but strangely enough when I got it, it was as free as the LEO. Nobody stopped me to yell "Hey, where's our buck?" When I picked up the July 8 copy, that was the first time I had ever bothered to give it a look.

From looking at The Voice-Tribune, something becomes clear very quickly — this is a paper for the elite. This, in and of itself isn't necessarily bad, and it can easily be argued this is a good business decision, to cater to a specific crowd (supposedly the creme de la creme of Louisville) and thus present advertising opportunities for local businesses to go after this set. Fair enough.

If you're into the "Society" thing, they have a huge section for that (considerably thicker than the news-oriented front page section), covering all the various inner culture goings-on for the well-connected. Again, don't take this for a knock, as I consider myself at least a wee-bit connected myself, despite my usual counterelitist mindset. Anyway, I thought it was interesting that in this particular issue, the front of the Society page featured what could be argued to be an event for the ordinarily very liberal: a meet and greet for the Kentucky Center for the Performing Arts. In fact, many, if not most of the guests pictured are locally known Democrats and progressives. On balance though, if one goes through the entire section, it's far more about parties of the elite than about anything ideological.

So, what's my real complaint about The Voice-Tribune? Well, it's rather simple: Its editorial board is clearly right-wing, and they don't allow other kinds of opinions anywhere near theirs.

In the sample I picked up, their editorial pages consisted of:

• An editorial from syndicated right-wing columnist Dennis Prager denigrating the idea that there could possibly be serious problems in a health care system that actually has very serious problems.
  
• An editorial from the right-wing celebrity columnist Michelle Malkin with her usual attack on the President.
  
• A local review of recent political events by Republican Ellen Call. (At least there's a local voice there.)
  

There was no presentation of progressive ideas whatsoever in what they call an editorial section. This section is normally supposed to be somewhat analogous to an open forum, but apparently they shut out the voices that don't conform to conservative or right-wing thought. Even the C-J lets their people in.

You know, it's possible I just caught the paper on an odd printing where they didn't have a progressive columnist lined up. I suspect that's not the case, but, of course, correct me if I'm wrong.

The thing that concerns me the most is the seeming overall suggestion that if you want to be a part of the elite "Society", you must agree with conservative ideology, as if there is no such thing as liberal elitism. I would recommend to this newspaper that they find a way to balance their editorial presentation so they will no longer continue to leave a strange and inaccurate impression like this.

And if they think that posting images of some liberals on one page counteracts the right-wing editorials on another, they must not think too much about the intelligence of its readership.

What do you think?

Steve Magruder — LouHI Administrator and web programmer


Please become a fan of Louisville History & Issues on Facebook

I don't agree with what they do (based on your write-up, I've never seen it myself) but they are well within their rights to publish whatever viewpoint they want. If they wanted to publish stories that the moon was made of cheese and that the Free Market was still valid then thats what they will publish.

I do think that right leaning publications and news sources keep a much tighter rein on what they allow into their materials, probably because if their readership actually opened their eyes and looked around (i.e. used a lick of common sense) they would see how regressive and anti-general public the policies are they would lose their entire base.

Steve, we all know that the media is all biased one way or the other. The majority are very left leaning especially the national outlets. It's obvious by which politicians they support and which ones they don't. The only National Media that favors the right wing at all is FOX and they really aren't that far right. Just because you happened to see a copy of a local paper that heavily supports conservative viewpoints is no reason to get upset. It's very easy if you look to find many that are just as bad leaning towards the liberal side! If you don't like it just don't read it. That's what most of us do with the CJ!

I've learned that whatever hits the fan will not be evenly distributed.

Msradell wrote:

Steve, we all know that the media is all biased one way or the other. The majority are very left leaning especially the national outlets. It's obvious by which politicians they support and which ones they don't. The only National Media that favors the right wing at all is FOX and they really aren't that far right. Just because you happened to see a copy of a local paper that heavily supports conservative viewpoints is no reason to get upset. It's very easy if you look to find many that are just as bad leaning towards the liberal side! If you don't like it just don't read it. That's what most of us do with the CJ!

I am not "upset".

My complaint is that the Voice-Tribune isn't presenting alternative opinions, like the left-leaning C-J indeed does.

Further, I would like to peruse the Voice-Tribune for the features it gets right. I also don't mind if they want to present a largely right-wing view on their editorial pages. I just think it's in their own good to attempt some balance, and thus better serve the community.

In addition, this isn't a discussion about national outlets.

This is about how newspapers serve the local market.

In the local media you also have LEO and Velocity, both left wing as well, and you would be hard-pressed to find anything right wing in those two publications, except for occasionally the "Liberal Dose" strip.

Besides, if you live in the far left, anything to the right will look far right.

Have you hugged your penguin today?

Proud member of the "Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy"

Bedford wrote:

In the local media you also have LEO and Velocity, both left wing as well, and you would be hard-pressed to find anything right wing in those two publications, except for occasionally the "Liberal Dose" strip.

But as far as I know, these publications don't have editorial sections, which are normally expected to be open forums in an ideological sense.

Bedford wrote:

Besides, if you live in the far left, anything to the right will look far right.

The same applies to right-wingers, certainly, but in reverse.

LEO might as well have, with its various permanent authors. Its editorial pieces, just spread out several pages.

Velocity can't even keep politics out of its Winners and Losers of the Week around, twice giving Mitch McConnell the Loser section on weeks he won big.

Plus, it has been my experience that on several forums I've belonged to in the past, when they do political ideology tests scored on a X,Y grid, the most right wing with get a score of 4,4 while you find a bunch of left wingers in the -8,-8 area. In other words, your Limbaughs and Becks would not be nearly as far on the right as your Obamas and Pelosis would be on the left.

Bedford wrote:

LEO might as well have, with its various permanent authors. Its editorial pieces, just spread out several pages. Velocity can't even keep politics out of its Winners and Losers of the Week around, twice giving Mitch McConnell the Loser section on weeks he won big.

Again, I'm talking about actual editorial sections, where there's the ordinary premise that an open exchange is to be taking place.

Bedford wrote:

Plus, it has been my experience that on several forums I've belonged to in the past, when they do political ideology tests scored on a X,Y grid, the most right wing with get a score of 4,4 while you find a bunch of left wingers in the -8,-8 area. In other words, your Limbaughs and Becks would not be nearly as far on the right as your Obamas and Pelosis would be on the left.

I'm not so sure that you can compare conservatives willing to participate in an open discussion with "Limbaughs and Becks", extremists who operate in enclaves without the allowance of opposing ideas.

In my experience, it's moderate conservatives and anyone to their left who is willing to discuss matters openly, while it's anyone to their right who will never compromise and thus can't deal with social discussion and arriving at agreements and agreeable disagreements.

Bedford wrote:

Velocity can't even keep politics out of its Winners and Losers of the Week around, twice giving Mitch McConnell the Loser section on weeks he won big. Plus, it has been my experience that on several forums I've belonged to in the past, when they do political ideology tests scored on a X,Y grid, the most right wing with get a score of 4,4 while you find a bunch of left wingers in the -8,-8 area. In other words, your Limbaughs and Becks would not be nearly as far on the right as your Obamas and Pelosis would be on the left.

even if he wins i wouldn't call McConnell a winner

about the grid — Political Compass is the best (imo) site i've found discussing the whole left / right axis situation and honestly, politicians in the US are pretty close to one another — not this huge chasm ideology that some people would want you to believe exists (at least by their metrics.)

http://www.politicalcompass.or...ection2008

http://www.politicalcompass.org/index