This Paper Just Apologized For Biased Coverage

There is no question the media coverage is the worst it’s ever been.

Reporters and news organizations have abandoned any pretense of objectivity and instead act as campaign surrogates for Hillary Clinton.

But one newspaper has had enough and apologized to their readers.

Like most local papers, The Daily Commercial of Leesburg, Florida depends on wire-service reports for national political news.

But this cycle, the Associated Press and Reuters have acted as partisan operatives rather than reporters.

Their goal has been to defeat Donald Trump.

Newsbusters reported on the newspaper’s editorial apology for using biased news sources for election coverage:

“This is less an editorial and more of an open letter to our readers. It’s part explanation, part reflection and part mea culpa.


It’s about how the media — including the Daily Commercial — has covered the presidential election.


Why, you may ask, do we feel the need to broach this topic at this late date in the election? Frankly, an uncomfortably sizable number of our readers have been writing and calling to express their dissatisfaction with what they believe is the media’s bias toward Donald Trump, and they are pointed in their criticism of the Daily Commercial, which they believe has gotten swept up in the anti-Trump wave. We felt we owed you a response.


First, it’s important to understand that, while the Daily Commercial is a local news organization first and foremost, we also see value in presenting a reasonably comprehensive platter of state, national and international news every day. For months, the contest between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton has commanded the nation’s attention like no other story, so of course that’s what we’ve focused on as well.


….Because we have limited space and resources, smaller papers are generally limited to covering the horse race — the day in-day out happenings on the campaign trail.”

So-called journalists justify their attempts to defeat Donald Trump by claiming he presents a unique challenge.

CNN’s Dylan Byers wrote:

“Spurred by Donald Trump’s unconventional style, controversial statements and tenuous relationship with the truth, many journalists and news organizations became more emboldened in contextualizing, fact-checking and, in some cases, editorializing on developments in the campaign.


The traditional model of “he said, she said” journalism, in which news reports simply put both sides of a story against one another, was thrown out the window in favor of a more aggressive journalism that sought to prioritize accuracy over balance.


To many journalists, political scientists and media experts, this was a welcome change: It unburdened the American press from false equivalency and made them more responsible stewards of information. To critics, especially on the right side of the political spectrum, the whole endeavor laid bare the innate biases of a coastal, liberal news media.


Whatever the interpretation, the change is real, and can be seen in front-page headlines that identify lies, cable news chyrons that fact-check in real time, and the commentary of reporters on television and social media who are more unbridled than ever before in offering their assessments on the state of the race.”

But real time fact checking – which is almost always partisan Democrat opinion journalism, masquerading as objective truth seeking – and aggressive call outs of candidates by using phrases such as “falsely claims” are never applied to Hillary Clinton.

The media is consumed with their hatred of all Republicans – especially Donald Trump – and use it as their excuse to rip off the mark and act on their partisan leanings.

Some claim normal journalism – where both sides are presented and the reader draws their own conclusions – will return after the election.

However critics believe a rabidly partisan press will find it impossible to discard campaigning for their favored party, should they taste success and Hillary Clinton wins the election.

  • SouthernPatriot

    Most local newspapers which are only alive due to local business advertisements, which they charge according to the number of subscriptions and readers. When the readers object to their leftist coverage, then readers cancel subscriptions and do not purchase the paper. Thus the readership goes down. The readers may even bring their objections to the local businesses which may discontinue their advertising so the papers’ income takes a hit in at least two ways. Most papers are hanging on tenuously.

    These newspapers rely on leftist sources for news feeds. That is where they are not exercising wisdom or taking into consideration the desires of their readers. The paper should apologize or probably face going out of business.

    • Rich Olmsted

      the sooner they and all other old media outlets go out of business the better.

    • Chickasaw1

      Apology at the last hour is hokey since they admitted getting many letters in protest of the bias.

  • Range Dog

    On election Day? Right.

  • cosmo007

    If this were not a reasonable country, say maybe China, the news people would be rounded up and executed and thrown in a common grave.

  • Tomohawk

    They must have taken a cue from FBI’s Comey: “This is really bad, and we’re acknowledging it now to make both sides feel better even though it won’t affect any outcomes – and so we don’t lose anymore ad revenue”. The MSM knows fully well they put Trump where he is by overwhelming us with positive 24/7 coverage during the primaries. The moment he got the nom, they maintained the degree of coverage but reversed the polarity, if you will. Sadly many ‘conservative’ outlets did the same thing.

  • Dick

    It is very easy to cancel one’s subscription to a local paper. When/if you do so, please make sure to inform the rep you speak to exactly why you are cancelling. The only way we can return to informational media with NO bias is to hit them in the pocketbook.

    • nicholsda

      We did, many years ago. The paper, The Miami Herald. About as left leaning as they come. Only day it was worth anything was Sunday. That gave a TV section, comics, and coupons worth more than the paper. Now I understand they even charge more if you want the TV section.

  • Chickasaw1

    Let me remind this newspaper that heavy bias against Rs and Chistians has been accelerating for years. This biased election coverage is nothing new other than media has taken it all the way to the top in not pretending that they were impartial. Everyone has know for years that they are ultra biased.

  • Chickasaw1

    Another bias that is rampant is that preachers (from the left) who support Democrats are NEVER in trouble for doing so, but when others do that for the conservative side all hell breaks loose and they hammer them with he IRS and threaten to take away their nonprofit tax deductions for it members. That continues to occur over and over. LBJ put us into this situation years ago.

  • jim jones

    Nothing says bullshit like a very late apology.

  • toothii

    Sorry don’t buy it! You don’t suddenly become ethical/professional overnite! Had HRC won, I doubt this paper or any others would admit to bias. They’d be saying they did the country a favor!

  • Anvil6

    How much FAVORABLE coverage of Trump and/or his policies have we seen today? How much UNFAVORABLE coverage?

    Yeah, me too. The only thing that has changed is that they now very grudgingly refer to “President Trump”.

  • annarose13

    We, The TRUE Americans has the last laugh. In spite of all their terrible lies & bias reports??? TRUMP WON!!!

  • sc

    This mea cupa is too little, too late. Criticisms of the liberal, biased media were made by Mr. Trump and by many others. The anti-Republican, anti-Conservative, anti-American bias are results of the liberals control of academia and the news media. The liberals have a ideology that is pernicious and Anti-everything that is not to their liking. This WAS a redux of the 1871 Tammany Hall Scandal — but on a larger scale in which NO ONE WAS HELD ACCOUNTABLE and all blame and hatred were spewed at Patriotic Americans, like the Tea Party, Trump Supporters, white males, etc. The grossness of the lib media with the insidious collusion of ALL the Democrats should be a warning to all.. The warning is: the democrats and its liberal media will do anything, say anything to gain and retain political power. They despise democracy, the U.S. Constitution and the American way of life, culture and traditions. For all their crimes against all who opposed them, they must be held fully accountable and prosecuted. To do otherwise is to encourage them to do worse because there were no consequences for their illegal actions. Their rights end when they infringe upon my rights.

  • 67primrose

    A bunch of Bull. All the paper had to do was to remove the slanted AP news against Trump while praising Clinton. It was very obvious from day one of the election that most so called news media was bias against Trump in favor of Clinton. They did the same thing for the inexperienced, unqualified Obama during his campaigns.

  • draftsman69

    This kind of media bias has been increasing bit by bit for decades until they’ve gotten so used to relying on it as the norm that they now no longer hesitate to be out and out hard lined with no apology nor regret. They no longer deny that they are biased and act as if that is the norm. If this isn’t stopped we won’t recognize this society. It will decay into a sewer of socialism that no one wants to be a part of.

  • cathylovesyou

    Do not believe the NY Times, they are like Obama and Hillary Liars.

    • cajanone1

      Trash media like the new York slimes are looking for subscriptions from all over. They have lost a lot of local subscriptions and need to fill the gap for their third rate coverage.

  • Chuck

    The news media, very simply, represent in massive degree the interests of the international money men. It has taken a long time for these “elites” to have gained dominion over the mainstream media, but they have managed that and have also managed to control the highest levels of our two major political parties. It is best to avoid mainstream reportage as it is primarily propaganda expressing the agenda of the internationalists.

  • Johnstoirvin

    “…the Associated Press and Reuters have acted as partisan operatives rather than reporters.” Julius Reuter must be rolling in his grave!

    Paul Julius Reuter, who established Reuter’s News Service in the mid-1800’s, deeply believed in two principles to which he demanded complete adherence from his people…. Speed and Truth. Media outlets who bought his reports also respected those same principles.

    Undoubtedly, one half of those principles… Speed… has continued to be important to the media. In fact, it has advanced to the point that news reports today are almost instantaneous and the struggle to be first to report the news remains as fierce as it was in Reuter’s time.

    However, the other half of his principles… Truth… seems to be of much less, and sometimes, no importance to the media today, which is confusing since the end users of their product, the people, want and demand the truth. I don’t know about everyone else, but I have a difficult time believing that much of the news I hear or read today has not been slanted, manipulated or had something omitted (like the truth).

  • cathylovesyou

    Who cares about Newspapers anymore, not the youth they aren’t interested in News and those who are get it online which is fake most times. I discontinued the NY Times in 2008 after 58 years. I read the WSJ and a local paper which is liberal but interesting and has local stuff only interested to us locals. Newspapers have dug their own graves. Networks like CBS,NBC, ABC, and their off shoots, and CNN do the American people a disservice and shouldn’t have freedom of the press unless they started using it like the founders intended. They are not a watchdog anymore better they must be watched. They most prints garbage taint the truth when it doesn’t fit their champion. Shame on them

  • Bob R

    seen this for quite some time. I am old enough to remember when there was a “Middle East desk” or a “European desk”. The “Anchor” would go to that person for a live feed for “news on the ground”. Once these “Reporters” stopped all thi$
    and went to the “wire” for their news (Reuters Etc.) I can “control” your “news” from a single source. The recent takeover of the “net” will repeat this. Google and others are already getting biased. Sad.