Contributor

John Campbell

John Campbell (R-Irvine) is a California State Senator representing the 35th District in Orange County. He represents the cities of Newport Beach, Laguna Beach, Irvine, Costa Mesa, Huntington Beach, Seal Beach and Cypress. He can be reached through his Senate website and through the website for his California Senate campaign. [go to Campbell index]

Media Bias…
Picking and choosing the facts...
[John Campbell] 5/20/05

This subject has certainly been in the news lately. Last year, of course, was the big CBS news debacle that resulted in the resignation of Dan Rather. Now, we have Newsweek's inaccurate reporting on the Koran that has resulted in riots and deaths.

Well, media bias and incomplete research are not limited to national media and international events. Right here, locally, we have issues as well. In the past, I have written about the bias of the reporting at the Los Angeles Times. Some of the well-known examples of this bias have occurred when the L.A. Times ran negative stories about Arnold Schwarzenegger based entirely on "anonymous" sources, while suppressing negative stories on Gray Davis because, according to the paper itself, the sources insisted on being entirely anonymous. L.A. Times’ bias is unquestioned and seems to be getting worse. They are in peril of further damaging their journalistic integrity. Their circulation numbers prove it, as their subscriptions are declining (down some 6% according to Editor and Publisher, October 2004). And they wonder why more and more people get their information from radio and Blogs, and why their circulation continues to plummet. If it weren't for the sports section...

At any rate, I had a personal experience with this bias last week. Last Monday, the L.A. Times ran a story on the front page of the newspaper entitled "Bills Seek State Tax Breaks for a Select Few: Wealthy taxpayers push narrowly targeted changes in law that can save them millions." The article quotes the source of their information, Lenny Goldberg, President of a liberal-financed organization called the California Tax Reform Association whose mission is to increase taxes.

The article specifically refers to one of my bills, SB 259, suggesting that I am carrying it for the sole purpose of providing Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen with a "tax break." It says that "budget analysts" call it the "Paul Allen bill." You get the point. Now here are the facts:

• It is not a tax "break" - The bill proposes to allow business taxpayers who have already earned tax credits and loss carryforwards that were literally taken from them by a change in law in the middle of 2002 to retain and utilize them. This is not a tax break for anybody. These people had their money stolen by the government.
• It is about fairness - I carried the bill because I hate it when the government changes the rules in the middle of the game to cheat taxpayers. This is one of several bills I have to remedy such injustices in the tax system.
• I did not carry it for Paul Allen or any other specific taxpayer - I had no idea if Paul Allen or any company he owns was affected by this law correction. His name was never mentioned in any discussions with reference to this bill.
• This bill is not about any single taxpayer, but about many - According to the Franchise Tax Board, over 3,000 companies have had their tax credits or net operating loss carryforwards extinguished by this unfair law. Those 3,000 companies could have more than 300,000 shareholders who are affected, although it is probably in the tens of thousands at a minimum.
• They printed the Democrats’ position as fact - The "budget analysts" they referred to in the article? Well, they are actually Democrat staffers who do not like the bill because it reduces taxes. They always have to justify their opposition to tax fairness, so they thought up this one as justification. And the L.A. Times, of course, immediately runs with anything that advances the liberal agenda.
• My bill is clearly not a one-taxpayer bill. It is probably a 20,000-taxpayer bill. But even if it were for one taxpayer, if that taxpayer had been wronged, is righting that wrong and standing on principle such a bad thing?

I have spoken to both the reporter who wrote the story and his Bureau Chief. Both seem to be nice people. Here’s the problem: I was not misquoted in the story. But I believe that they decided what the story would be before they researched the facts. They did not research the facts thoroughly because they were supporting their own conclusion they had reached before a finger ever hit a keyboard. The article was inaccurate because of what it left out and what it did not say, as much as by what it did say.

The L.A. Times then wrote an editorial on this same subject talking about lobbyists who can "bend open a potential loophole for loyal clients." A loophole!! That is absolute rubbish! If this law is about a loophole, then taking a knife out of someone's back is a form of massage.

I have asked the L.A. Times to print a retraction. They are on the mailing list for this e-mail. We'll see what they do.

You’ve heard my 2 cents, now feel free to read the articles for yourselves:

www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-me-taxcode9may09,1,7571543,print.story

www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-tax12may12,0,2282632,print.story

CRO

§