We usually don't put much stock in claims of media bias, since political candidates and campaigns in both parties have a knack for blaming the messenger for their inability to get out the message.

But there are times when the partisanship and favoritism are so apparent that they cannot be denied. This presidential election is such an occasion.

According to a survey released by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, American voters overwhelmingly believe the media want Barack Obama to win the election. By a margin of 70 percent to 9 percent, voters say most journalists are hoping for an Obama victory. Eight percent of voters believe journalists don't favor either candidate, and 13 percent say they don't know which candidate has journalists' support.

And where would voters get such an idea? A separate study by the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism looks at the campaign coverage in recent weeks and finds what you might expect if you consume a lot of news: McCain's press has been more negative than positive, and Obama has received more positive coverage than negative.

In the case of the presidential race, the media aren't fooling anyone with their pretense of objectivity. Little wonder that Americans have such a low opinion of the journalism profession when they perceive reporters and editors as something less than honest brokers. Those of us in the opinion business are supposed to take sides. You might even say that we're supposed to be biased. But that isn't the case for our colleagues in the reporting ranks. Too often, journalists covering the presidential campaign have blurred this distinction.

In this election, too many supposedly objective journalists have made their first choice perfectly clear.

REPRINTED FROM THE SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE.

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.