Comments on: The "Liberal Media" Smoking Gun?

[gregory.robertson]

The scariest part of this story is CBS not allowing its reporters to contribute to political candidates -- a clear violation of those reporters' First Amendment right to self-expression. If CBS wants to eliminate it's name from the contibutors lists, it should give the reporters an alternate "employer name" to list when they contribute. Even a fake one. But for any employer to make giving to your chosen candidates grounds for firing is just wrong.

Okay, out of 100,000 people in the newspaper industry, someone finds 148 (less than 1%) theater and food critics who have contributed to a political candidate, and that is touted a representative of "liberal bias"? And Brian Montopoli treats this as some kind of legitimate assertion?

No mention, of course, about how many tens and hundreds of millions of dollars the Big Five media empires pour into Washington via lobbyists and PACs to represent THEIR point of view.

It is more remarkable that less than 1% of people in the press are willing to fork over $200 to participate in their democracy. To assert that it somehow "proves" liberal bias that 3 food critics and a sports statistician are Democrats (as are 40% of voting adults) is verging on the most idiotic kerfluffle of the month.

[lonewackodot]

I find this report both shocking and horrifying, and I'm worried for this country. Can you believe that 11% of the press corps (give or take) are not liberals? What can be done about this? Should there be Congressional Hearings?

http://lonewacko.com/blog/archives/006785.html

[johnnye6]

I think the real reason is that because of their research, journalists know more about what's going on behind the scenes than the general public. They see how policies espoused by idealogical politicians really affect people. If seeing the truth defines what is a Liberal, and not wishful thinking, I suppose most reporters would naturally be liberal.

[memekiller]

Journalists, like the current Democratic Party, share the ideaology of the center. But splitting every baby, slaughtering sacred cows and advocating every devil while giving him his due is as flawed as any ideaology when done unthinkingly.

When one party caters to the base, and the other party tries to triangulate non-existent hippies for a media that believes the center is halfway between Pat Buchanan and Joseph Lieberman, you get pretty much what you have today: Holocaust deniers gets equal time with historians, torture is something all reasonable people embrace and anyone who dares to stand up for what 60% of the nation believes is an extremist who has no place on your show.

So instead of true dissenters from conservative conventional wisdom, all you give us are centrist journalists who carp to right wing talking points to "play against type" and earn their bonafides with skeptical Republicans, and unapologetic conservative pundits for counterpoint.

So journalists, like Lieberman Democrats and non-conservative Klien, spend all their time mocking the strawmen they won't allow on their show to prove they're reasonable, level headed and above the fray, when they are more captive to their ideaology than anyone.

[raymo15-2009]

The same mind set exists on college campuses across the nation. If you are perceived to be a conservative , your chance of being hired is slim and none. If by some miracle you are hired, you will simply be replacing the token conservative that was fired. This happens at the New York Times, The Washington Post, the L.A. Times and the vast majority of of rags around the nation. This report proves it, and no amount of spin will change it. Ask ANY journalist about the first amendment, then ask about the second. If their answer doesn't convince you....there's no hope for you.

[one_american]

archangelric:

Thanks for illustrating MY point, with your defense of the liberal LIE.

Simpleton.

[mattcat25]

Maybe, people including journalists don%u2019t like the detrimental policies of the Republican Party?

[raymo15-2009]

The credo of ANY journalism school should be....who, what, when, where and why......NOT who, what, when, where ,why and MY OPINION, One should not become a journalist to be a change agent. Your job is to report what you see, what you hear, and let others decide what to do about it. Please don't interpret for me what a politician says, for example , right after a debate. Please allow me to make up my own mind. The bottom line is.....we simply no longer trust you, to be (to coin a phrase)..'fair and balanced'...

[beretverde]

Remember, the media elites all used their draft deferments from serving in the Vietnam War. They were then indoctinated in the "liberal thinking" (which was/is the popular ideal) on campus. Being young and impressionable, you then get liberal graduates. Later on in life, one must espouse these liberal ideals to get promoted and in positions of power while working in the media. Cause and effect 101.