Selection bias in the Washington Post

When we think of "media bias," the manifestation that we tend to think of is skewed coverage of obvious news stories. We see this over and over again, as the press covers a story from the liberal or Democratic point-of-view, starting with the Democratic position as the baseline and the Republican position as a variation from "the way things ought to be." But there's another way that bias manifests itself, and we don't always notice it as clearly. That is selection bias, covering as news issues or events that really aren't, just because it can make one party (say, the Democrats) look good or one party (for example, the Republicans) look bad. The Washington Post is indulging in selection bias today with its piece Vacationing Bush Poised to Set a Record.

The president departed Tuesday for his longest stretch yet away from the White House, arriving at his Crawford ranch in the evening for five weeks of clearing brush, visiting with family and friends, and tending to some outside-the-Beltway politics. By historical standards, it is the longest presidential retreat in at least 36 years.

The August getaway is Bush's 49th trip to his cherished ranch since taking office and the 319th day that Bush has spent, entirely or partially, in Crawford -- nearly 20 percent of his presidency to date, according to Mark Knoller, a CBS Radio reporter known for keeping better records of the president's travel than the White House itself. Weekends and holidays at Camp David or at his parents' compound in Kennebunkport, Maine, bump up the proportion of Bush's time away from Washington even further.

Does that report sound familiar? It does to anyone who followed politics during the 1980s, as it was major media sport to marvel at Reagan's "vacation" time. And now they're at it again. When Bill Clinton left Washington, there was coverage, but it was the kind of coverage that emphasized how important and glamorous he was. When George W. Bush leaves Washington, as was the case with Ronald Reagan before him, it's indicative of "a lackadaisical approach to the world's most important day job."

Oh, sure, they present the other case as well, but again, when you present both sides as equal, and one's nonsense, you elevate nonsense to importance. The Presidency is a 24-hour a day job, 365 days a year - there's not been a minute since his first inaugural when George W. Bush was not the President, with all of the powers and responsibilities that entails. But the Washington Post has deemed it appropriate to give credence to the idea that he's taken too much time off, just by covering the story.