When Biased Journalists Sound Off

The title of "journalist" often comes with the disputed labels of "fair" and "objective." The vast majority of professional journalists tend to adhere to fairness standards. They report from all sides and come to reasonable conclusions, even in opinion columns. But there are the so-called bad apples out there, as well as the rotten apples who employ and publish them.

One of these biased journalists is Stephen Clark of the ultimate source of bias, FOX News. On June 17, he published an article to FOXNews.com about the comparison of Vice President Joe Biden to former Vice President Dick Cheney. The preconceptions and slants Clark carried into this piece were so obvious the article insulted its viewing audience.

His use of certain phrases and placement of words may give him away by themselves. He makes direct reference to "a hostile Muslim world." Says whom? That's a good way to turn many thousands of people away. "A turbulent Middle East" would work better here. He talks about the "light-fare trips" that Biden has taken since taking office while hoisting Cheney onto a pedestal with stronger, more positive language. He also claims that Biden "has drawn far more attention" for political mishaps than for his work. Again, where may your sources be? He barely backs up this statement with any depth.

The interview subjects Clark quoted even more so told the tale of a political agenda. Every person he quoted -- only about two or three -- were all over Cheney. He apparently interviewed nobody who could stand up for Biden. Other than past quotes from President Obama and Biden, nothing in the article defends them. I would at least get some opinions on both men and why they might be good for the job before I jump to my conclusion. These subjects were very one-sided. I think this article would have been better served to use quotes in smaller quantities from more experts. That way we not only get more diverse coverage of opinion, but we may also learn more facts. Clark couldn't step out of his way long enough to deliver these goods.

Clark does make occasional weak efforts to make Biden look mediocre. He also admits, through one of his experts, that each man was the better fit for his president. But that's about it as far as venturing outside of his narrow prism goes.

Was Cheney better than Biden has been so far at his post? Maybe he was. But this article didn't do enough research or show enough depth to convince me. Perhaps it was a quality draft and the editors chopped it down to fit word quotas. I'm not sure. I'll just do the smart thing for now and research it further on my own.