When the news media in general suffers accusations of bias, its defenders often resort to the "kill the messenger" counter-offensive where they recite the story of the messenger who upon delivering a disturbing message is ordered executed by the King. Employing this metaphor is a very effective tactic since the story is undeniably tragic. Presumably, under its influence we see the members of the News Media as innocent victims of circumstance. But are they?

If we think of a messenger as one who is bearing a message which he did not write and of which he may be unfamiliar, his execution is clearly unjust. However, if the messenger made the observation firsthand, or gathered the observations of first-hand observers, then reported back in his own words, then he is no longer just a messenger. He is a reporter and the resulting message is the reporter’s own product. If that message was inaccurate because of the reporter’s biases and carelessness, his execution may be judged fair or vicious or somewhere in-between depending on the consequences of his report.

No, the members of the News Media are much more than a simple messengers and their contribution to a report include not only facts, but error and bias. It’s inevitable—as long as they are human.