RAY CROW

Perspective

Balanced news confuses Americans.

My job each day includes perusing the Casper Star-Tribune's services for national and international news and selecting what will appear in the paper.

One day recently I was looking at the articles arriving about Sen. John McCain and Sen. Barack Obama, and I realized there were multiple news articles about McCain and his running mate that you readers would find negative. The articles, or stories as we call them, about Obama did not place him in a negative light.

I worried about producing the Star-Tribune's content that day in a way that would appear as if the news department was taking sides in the presidential contest. I quit worrying when I read a story about a poll that showed voters were viewing McCain quite favorably. I placed that story next to a story that summarized some of the negative information and decided that I had demonstrated fairness to you readers.

But is fairness or balance treating you fairly? I think not. Maybe that day, when I balanced the news, I should have given you a chance to read more about problems arising for McCain or his running mate.

Yet, what I did is much like what news organizations do routinely. On another day I chose to run an article about a survey that showed racial bias in voter attitudes. Someone said well, we could compare that story to news about bias against older people. Therefore, news that concerned attitudes toward Obama was balanced with earlier news that concerned attitudes toward McCain.

Most every day, now, you can a see television news clips of one candidate followed by talking-head reporters or analysts. Each time you see this sequence you see another: the same drill involving the other candidate, reporter and analyst.

Here's what it tells you: Everything one candidate says has equal value to what the other says.

That's nonsense.

I puzzle over many things about people's attitudes about political figures and the grave issues facing out country. But I think I understand one reason Americans seem so confused about selecting a president: the balancing of news.

So how should voters make an informed decision in favor of a presidential candidate?

Yes, read the newspaper, check for instant news fixes on your cell phone or computer, listen to radio news, and watch TV news. Read commentaries about the candidates. The newspaper offers opinions from the right and left.

But analyze the balanced news and commentary and try to learn more about the serious issues of the day. Check the presidential candidates' own Web sites. Include perspectives that might differ from yours. Go to the library and borrow books on recent political history, business history and history of the founding fathers of the United States. Select books that show evidence their content is based on reliable research.

Try reading news publications committed primarily to honest reporting of national issues. There aren't many, but you can find them online if not elsewhere.

If possible, watch the debates between the candidates. It doesn't matter who wins the arguments. What matters is whether one of the candidates shows a perspective that makes more sense to you. But the debates, to some extent, feed the same problem of the balanced approach to news.

Reading will serve you better. You'll find things that will disconcert you. You'll find things that support your political views. And you'll find information that makes sense to you, whether it surprises or confirms.

All this can consume your time, but I believe your choice is critical for the future of the United States and for your grandchildren.

Surely that's worth reading about.

Ray Crow is the Star-Tribune's wire editor.