I was more than intrigued at the play — or lack of — that the Chattanooga Times Free Press gave to the Iowa primary results in its Friday edition. While above the front-page fold, our local primary print medium limited its coverage to a two-column upper-left page “lesser significance,” smaller headline type display, choosing instead to make the on-going story of a retiring judge’s strange behavior its top story.

Journalism 101 teaches that display is determined by the significance or “weight” of the news item. In contrast to the TFP, the city’s only citywide alternate widespread daily print medium, USA Today, treated the Iowa results as its top story with a large two-line banner display on the Iowa election results.

Noting USA Today and the TFP displayed side by side at a local convenience market, I was struck immediately by the difference in news display. The immediate question: is this is an aberration or an editorial slant? Are we in the 21st Century still dealing with the city’s traditional 19th Century racial mindset or is there some unknown policy coming from the TFP’s Arkansas-based ownership related to the Baptist pastor’s success or racial bias.

In an effort to be objective, I examined front pages of major metropolitan newspapers across the country. Without exception, all major newspapers — representing the entire political spectrum — gave far more prominent display to the Iowa elections than our local primary print newspaper.

What was the editorial staff of the TFP thinking? The results were only one of the most significant news items in months.
This presidential election issue is only one of the most defining points in the history of the Republic with the direction of our nation in the Middle East at stake; immigration policy and the huge export of our jobs in this global economy. And a local judge’s crazy, personal antics are more important?

Does the TFP’s low-profile coverage reflect an inherent political (read conservative) or racial (read black as in Obama) bias.

Publisher Tom Griscom’s conservative political orientation is well-established: Howard Baker White House aide under Reagan; active participant in various state and local Republican political causes, etc. I commend the paper for its editorial pages balance, offering both progressive and conservative views. But I fault the paper’s top policy makers for letting apparent bias reflect in the display of the news.

Frankly, it’s difficult to understand completely the motives: was it Obama’s success and his race; or Huckabee’s stunning upset of Romney? Or does the staff not understand fundamentals of journalism? From the Atlanta Constitution, the Nashville Tennessean, Washington Times, Washington Post to the New York Times, editors nationally — even internationally - saw the historic events of Thursday in Iowa as hugely important.

I like to think Chattanooga is making great strides in so many areas. Yet based on the Thursday TFP, I am not sure that objective print media is one of our progress areas. In blending the community’s two former daily papers, overall TFP has done a commendable job, offering good comprehensive local and regional coverage. Note the awards the paper has received in recent years from its peers.

Biased editorial policy? Publisher bias reflected in news display? An anomaly? Whatever, show your readers that you are above the taint of subtle racism or political bias. Treat major news as major news in the words of one-half of your heritage “without fear or favor.”

Ron Patton
Hixson

* * *

Mr. Patton has raised the issue of the paper not treating the Iowa results as the major news of the day. He has implied this is because of Mr. Griscom's bias. I would like to suggest that for most people in Chattanooga, this was not the biggest story in our lives. I find fault all the time in the type of stories that lead, but Iowa is just the first in a long battle. It was historic in that Obama was the first black to win Iowa and it may mean the end of Clinton. But I for one do not think this is the biggest story in Chattanooga as this battle will continue for some time.

I do think that it is silly to make the claim there is a bias against Democrats in choosing stories though. I think the paper chooses stories based on its audience and, if Mr. Patton is depending on the paper to give him complete information on this type of story, he is behind the times. National elections are a matter of the TV and the blogs and that is where the information is found.

Bruce Caldwell
Signal Mountain
sarmatt25@comcast.net