This article addresses bias in the American press and shows how the inevitability of reporting from a point of view challenges the possibility of a newspaper of record on the Middle East. Examining 30 days of coverage of the Intifada, it both shows that coverage of events varied across three mainstream US newspapers – The New York Times, The Washington Post and Chicago Tribune – and demonstrates that in the case of the newspaper most often called a newspaper of record – The New York Times – coverage varied in distinct ways from other mainstream newspapers. The article thus considers how the Times' reputation and influence converge with its record in creating a broader impression about the perspective of the US press on the Middle East.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zelizer et al. (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: