Last week, my colleague Julie Gunlock (who spent time in New Orleans working for the Red Cross after Hurricane Katrina) wrote a great piece on the media double standard in covering the Bush Administration’s handling of Katrina compared to the current Administration’s actions after the Gulf oil spill. Paul Rubin made a similar point in yesterday’s WSJ, noting that the oil spill occurred on federal territory and the federal government has acted as an impediment to state clean up efforts, compared to Katrina, in which states and locals had primary responsibility, and impeded federal efforts. Yet the media has largely given the Obama team a pass, while they vilified Bush.
Today, this newsbusters piece provides another example of media bias. It highlights the total disconnect between how the media reacted to military generals who criticized President Bush’s policies (that was brave, patriotic dissent) compared to Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s criticism of the Obama Administration (treasonous insubordination).
Personally, I think that part of a general’s job duties is to keep his criticisms to himself for as long as he is serving. Yet part of a journalists job description is to be unbiased when covering the news, so obviously generals aren’t the only ones who disregard core job duties.