I discern some bias in the Washington Post, a leading "liberal" paper; and no, it isn't "liberal bias," either. It actually might be more accurately interpreted as "conservative bias," dealing another blow to the "liberal media" myth. Yesterday, the 20th, there were massive global protests against the US war and occupation in Iraq, predominately in areas outside the United States. Any mention? No. However, there is mention of the protests in New York City, which was not deemed important enough for the front page; it's on page 9. On page 2, we hear about "minibottle" liquor in a South Carolina bar, which takes precedence over the global reaction to our ongoing occupation. In addition to that, a story about some US soldiers who were charged with assaulting and abusing Iraqi POWs is relegated to page 21. Finally, the layout of at least the front page of the New York Times, another so-called "liberal" newspaper, is roughly the same. The most important article of its front page is also the story of the election in Taiwan. Just like the Post, there is no mention of the global protests on the front page. In fact, the front page of the Boston Globe has a big picture of the Manhattan protests; the story is on page ten of the paper. On behalf of the American mainstream press, this is a disgrace.
To my knowledge, these are the only news sources that have covered the global "M20" protests: the British Broadcasting Corp., the Independent, and the IMC (Independent Media Center). The Washington Post did not, at least not in its "A" section, where all of the important global events are reported; when we are acknowledging that the Post is widely considered to be one of the best papers in the world, this is truly a terrible revelation, indeed.