I don’t focus much on media bias because journalists generally aren’t dishonest. Instead, they choose which stories to highlight or downplay based on what advances their political agenda. Though every so often I’ll highlight an example of where bias leads to an egregious (maybe even deliberately dishonest) mistake.

  • Like the time a column in the New York Times argued that “austerity” kills people, but the examples cited were countries where the burden of government spending was higher.
  • Or the time that the Washington Post said that a $71 billion increase in Medicaid spending was a 25 percent cut?
  • And how about when the New York Times published a story about schools being “starved of funding” when even a cursory look at the data would confirm outlays have climbed substantially.

    • Now we have an addition to that collection from a WonkBlog column in the Washington Post. The piece starts with an accurate observation that the tax plan on Capitol Hill isn’t a long-run tax cut.

    Senate rules require the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act not to add to the federal deficit after 10 years. …The bill aims to cut corporate taxes in perpetuity…but they actually need to raise money to offset the permanent corporate tax reduction.

    Yes, as I wrote two weeks ago, the long-run tax cuts have to be offset by long-run revenue increases. So that part of the column is fine.

    We then get this rather dubious assertion.

    Republicans are paying for a permanent cut for corporations with an under-the-radar tax increase on individuals.

    In part, it’s a dodgy claim because there are provisions in the bill that collect more revenue from companies, such as the partial loss of interest deductibility and various base erosion rules. So if he wanted to be accurate, the author should have begun that sentence with “Republicans are partially paying for…”

    Print Friendly, PDF & Email

    Related Posts