home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1990
/
1990 Time Magazine Compact Almanac, The (1991)(Time).iso
/
time
/
020689
/
02068900.006
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1990-09-17
|
5KB
|
86 lines
PRESS, Page 58Confessions of a Closet LeftistA veteran reporter reveals his 24-year undercover careerBy Laurence Zuckerman
The debate over political bias in the press is as old as
newspapers themselves. For years right-wing critics have complained
that the U.S. news media are a bastion of anti-Establishment
liberalism, while left-of-centers charge that ownership by
corporate conglomerates has turned the country's newspapers and TV
networks into profit-hungry servants of the Establishment. Rarely,
however, does the debate get down to cases. What would happen, for
example, if a radical socialist went to work, politically
incognito, for some of the nation's most prestigious newspapers?
That is the question raised by the extraordinary confession of
veteran reporter A. Kent MacDougall. Writing in the Monthly Review,
an obscure socialist magazine (circ. 7,000), MacDougall declares
that during his 24-year career as a reporter for the Wall Street
Journal and the Los Angeles Times, he "helped popularize radical
ideas" as a "usually covert, occasionally openly anti-Establishment
reporter." A journalism professor at the University of California,
Berkeley, since 1987 (he is now on sabbatical), MacDougall, 57,
says that only the security of tenure finally enabled him to reveal
himself as a "closet socialist boring unobtrusively from within
(the) bourgeois press." His epitaph: "Eugene V. Debs may be my
all-time favorite American and Karl Marx my all-time favorite
journalist. But my employer for a decade was the Wall Street
Journal."
MacDougall was quickly singled out by conservative critics as
living proof of the press's alleged liberal slant. "It shows once
more how easy it is to hoodwink our media elite," wrote Reed
Irvine, chairman of the right-wing pressure group Accuracy in Media
(AIM). The conservative weekly Human Events said MacDougall's
revelations will no doubt "raise concerns about the ability of
Marxist agents to penetrate the mainstream media." The Wall Street
Journal issued a statement expressing its outrage. "It is
troubling," said the Journal, "that any man who brags of having
sought to push a personal, political agenda on unsuspecting editors
and readers should be teaching journalism at a respected
university."
MacDougall now maintains that his tongue was firmly in cheek
when he implied in his articles that he had pursued a secret
agenda. The point of the article, he says, was to debunk radical
misconceptions about the daily press. "Rigid-minded right-wingers
and rigid-minded left-wingers have a lot in common," he adds. "I
wanted to knock down the conspiracy theories by pointing out that
individual reporters can get across a lot of uncomfortable truths
to the public."
Whatever his motivation, MacDougall's shadowy career does
reveal something about the limits of ideological bias in the
mainstream media. MacDougall stresses that his beliefs merely
influenced the types of stories he tried to pursue. "I was first
and foremost a journalist," he says, "and I stuck to accepted
standards of newsworthiness, accuracy and fairness."
Many of his pieces, including profiles of radical historians
and economists and lengthy series on inequality and deforestation,
are well-reported stories that stand up to scrutiny nearly 20 years
later. Writing in the AIM newsletter, author Joseph Goulden finds
bias in a 1970 profile of journalist I.F. Stone because MacDougall
neglected to say that Stone had been a doctrinaire Stalinist (a
charge Stone dismisses as "absolute nonsense"). In fact,
MacDougall's article does quote Stone as saying that he was a
"Communist-anarchist" in his youth and had since come to describe
himself as "half a liberal, half a radical."
MacDougall's former editors remember him as a cantankerous man
whose meticulous and exhaustive reporting was worth the trouble.
"He was a star," says William Thomas, the recently retired Los
Angeles Times editor who recruited MacDougall as a special writer
in the late 1970s. Michael Gartner, who edited MacDougall's
front-page Journal stories in the 1960s, and is now president of
NBC News, calls him an "editor's dream. He was a very thorough,
very careful, very good reporter."
Both men insist that MacDougall's stories had to pass through
a gauntlet of editors who would have prevented him from pursuing
any hidden agenda. "It might happen once," says Thomas, "but then
a flag would go up." Gartner believes the presence of a socialist
on the paper probably benefited Journal readers. "Diversity on the
staff is something you hope for," he notes. MacDougall says this
was exactly his point. Upset by the hostile response, he has
produced a revised version of the MR article that will appear in
the upcoming issue of the Columbia Journalism Review.