The AP Does Not ♥ D.C.

Congress’ approval rating is at an all-time low of 9 percent, and if the Associated Press gets its way, that number will be dropping even further. The AP wags its finger today at the disagreement over extending jobless benefits and the Social Security payroll tax cut. Two proposals, one put together by the GOP and the other by Democrats, have since been voted down in the Senate, but the original headline announced that “Congress bickers its way toward year-end compromise.”

The AP has long been characterized by its folksy tone (“Count your blessings this Thanksgiving. It’s good for you.”) and tabloid leanings (missing children, small-town murders and the Michael Jackson trial regularly make the splash page). It seems the organization pictures its stereotypical reader as a down-home Midwesterner who shakes her head at political shenanigans and says things like, “I just don’t see why those idiots in Washington can’t get along.” In its eagerness not to be perceived as a member of the media elite, the AP offers not objective reporting but value judgments designed to appeal to common-sense fans of Rick Perry’s “Fed Up!” (subtitle: “Our Fight to Save America from Washington”).

Thus, we are given an article by David Espo and Andrew Taylor that frowns at both parties for “seeking political advantage for elections almost a year distant.” It reads more like an opinion piece than a news story, using colorful language like “bickered” and “blustered.” Apparently nobody in Washington simply argues or negotiates anymore; instead, they conduct themselves like warring spouses or gathering hurricanes. The mainstream media is often accused of liberal bias, but the real bias at the AP is one toward the viewpoint of the reporters themselves. Washington gridlock disgusts plenty of people, but better newspapers convey that message by quoting average Americans or interviewing political scientists. By contrast, the AP takes sides, as if striving to place itself firmly in the camp of the Everyman. The words it uses to describe both parties are heavy with negative connotations. Republicans aim to offset the cost of the payroll tax cut by “reducing government bureaucracy.” Who can defend bureaucracy, which is associated with paper pushers and middle managers? “Air traffic controllers” or “FBI agents” are more difficult to cut. Contrast that to the more neutral statement from the Times that the Republican proposal would pay for the extension by “cutting the federal work force by 10 percent.” The AP also writes that Democrats wouldn’t just levy a surtax on high incomes; they’d be responsible for “slapping a 3.25 percent surtax on incomes of $1 million or more.” No one thinks slapping is very nice, even if the slappee is a millionaire.

Comedians and pundits are fond of wondering about the identity of the 9 percent of Americans who still approve of Congress. Are they all members of the Pelosi or Cantor families? Here’s one thing we can say: They probably don’t read newspapers that subscribe to the AP.