The Washington Post on the Democratic Debate

“It’s easy to forget, but it’s true: There’s a Democratic campaign for president.” – The Washington Post

Yes, that was the very first opening sentence to The Washington Post’s article, “Decoding the Democratic debate,” the debate that was held of October 14. Clearly, there is no media bias at all. Right?

The Washington Post, known for its conservative editorial page, starts off by implying throughout the article how the Democratic debate and its candidates are running in circles with Sander’s “wonkish” crowd rallies, Clinton’s emails, and Vice President Biden’s indecisiveness for if he “feels like running yet.” Stating through specific word choice that this debate does not have much to offer to the viewers.

However not to go unmentioned was their “decoding” of certain terms Democratic candidates will prefer to use, “bluffing” what words they are actually meaning to say. Such words The Washington Post categorized under this bluff are “the undocumented” meaning illegal immigrants and “dreamers” for those who were brought to the United States by their parents, lacking citizenship. They argued that the candidates use these terms as a way to trick and convince the viewers of their certain political views.

This article was a guide to the Democratic debate and a warning to all who were planning to watch it. It is evident in the way The Washington Post phrases their wording and how they chose to highlight the Democratic debate that there is a clear bias, leaning conservative.

The Washington Post on the Democratic Debate

One thought on “The Washington Post on the Democratic Debate

  1. Olle Nykvist says:

    I agree that this is a pretty clear instance of bias, but I’m not really that worried about it since news papers often have a stated bias rather than the “open secret” bias that cable news tends to have. Furthermore I actually think the opening line is rather funny and highlights an important issue for the Democrats in the upcoming election: name recognition. Whereas the Republican field has a lot of well known names, both amongst the frontrunners and the “B-team”, the Democratic field seems largely to be a cage fight between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, with occasional color commentary from the other people on stage, people no one really knows or cares about. Viewed this way the Washington Post might actually be helpful to the Democratic party in underscoring this rather uncomfortable truth.

    But as far as bias in news paper editorials go, I really don’t care. As I stated earlier, papers often have a stated political profile and editorials are the epitome of that…by their very nature they are biased. I actually like that, I don’t have to wonder and can instead focus on the points made, fully aware that I’m reading a certain angle and that I should probably read more on the issue before making my final verdict.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s