06.13a. Don Feder on the Liberal Media: A Definitive Article. . Don Feder has written the best analysis of the liberal near-monopoly on news and publishing that I've seen. It simply notes facts, the most powerful mode of argument when one is speaking to thinking people (admittedly, a very special case):
* Liberals have The New York Times; conservatives have The Washington Times.

* Liberals have The Washington Post; conservatives have The New York Post.

* Liberals have ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and NPR; conservatives have FOX News.

* Liberals have Harvard, Yale and the rest of the Ivy League (not to mention 95 percent of Americaís colleges and universities; conservatives have Hillsdale College and Bob Jones University.

* Liberals have the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations; conservatives have the Heritage Foundation and American Enterprise Institute.

* Liberals have Random House and Simon and Schuster; conservatives have Regnery.

* Liberals have Time and Newsweek; conservatives have Human Events and National Review.

* Liberals have Hollywood (cranking out PC message movies like The Day After Tomorrow and Saved); conservatives have "The 700 Club."

In terms of media firepower, liberals have ICBMs, nuclear warheads, and Apache attack helicopters. That conservatives are heard at all is a testament to the potency of their views.

Mr. Feder is strong on both facts and theory-- note that the last sentence is an interesting theoretical implication of the facts that precede it. He also brings up a point I'd never considered before about surveys of liberalism vs. conservatism:

Of 547 media professionals (reporters and editors) surveyed, 34 percent called themselves liberals, compared to a measly 7 percent who said they were conservatives. Among the general public, 33 percent embrace conservatism, while 20 percent espouse liberalism.

The Pew Study understates the case. After working in a newsroom for almost 20 years, I can tell you for a fact that most media liberals think theyíre moderates.

That is, any survey of a group far from the average of the population must take into account context: a person may truly be a moderate in the newsroom, even while being on the far left in the same city generally. A moderate Naderite is as far-left Republican.

Mr. Feder then proceeds to demolish, with facts, the liberal counterargument:

Liberals like Brock counter that liberals in the media are scrupulously fair and unbiased, so their personal beliefs are irrelevant.

Which is why The New York Times et al. invariably described Jesse Helms as an ultra- conservative, but Ted Kennedy is never labeled an ultra-liberal. Which is why pro- abortion demonstrations are always covered to the hilt, while pro-life marches usually rate the proverbial dogís obituary. Which is why Haitiís former military regime was a "junta," but Fidel Castro is Cubaís "president." Which is why partial-birth-abortion is designated a "late-term abortion procedure," murders committed with a handgun are "handgun homicidesí? (Stop that gun, before it kills again!) Pornography is "adult entertainment." Oh, and Bill Clintonís sex life was no oneís business but his own, but Anita Hillís charges against Clarence Thomas deserved full-time network airing.

In coverage of Ronald Reaganís passing, a network anchorman noted that the ex-president "gave conservatism a human face." As opposed to what -- the Frankenstein mask it usually wears? Now, try to imagine a newscaster speaking of someone who "gave liberalism a human face."

It is possible to have strong political views but be fair. That is not the way of the modern liberal, though (it may or may not have been of the liberal circa 1960; that is a question of history I don't know enough about). The modern liberal is a self-proclaimed relativist, who does not believe in unbiased truth. Naturally, such a person does not believe in fairness or honesty either, both being relative. I do not say this is true of 100% of liberals, but it is true of most of them, and for the rest this principle and the approval of their proudly relativist fellows is a strong aid to the natural human tendency to cheat. So what do we expect, but lies?

[This page is http://www.rasmusen.org/w/04.06.13a.htm]

To return to Eric Rasmusen's weblog, click http://www.rasmusen.org/w/0.htm.


TrackBack test