Sunday, December 02, 2007
Whither 'liberal media'?
My pal SteveAudio (who makes the bad sound good and the good sound better) has a thought-provoking post up about the oft-repeated 'liberal media' meme that gets trotted out whenever the heat gets hot for conservative thought.
Now, I'm an obsessive news troller...Partly for fueling my little pastiche hobby, and partly out of deeply ingrained habit, being a newsie's kid wanting to keep up my end of the table talk.
And ever since this meme began circulating about 'liberal media', I have looked for data that would support or enhance such a conclusion, to expand upon my own subjective experience.
I wasn't interested in demographic studies that purported to show reporters being 'liberal' in their personal lives, because those same charts showed that editorial and media ownership groups trended just as sharply to the conservative end of the spectrum in executive and business affairs, creating a rather obvious offset.
And anyone with even a minor understanding of news reportage knows that reporters don't just plop out a completed screed on their hapless editor's desk and scamper off to their socialist glee club meetings astride a rainbow colored unicorn with no expectation of revision or spiking.
But let us accept for an argument the sub rosa conservative premise that liberal thought does indeed infest the news divisions and reporter's pools, and is stealthily manipulating an easily gulled public into substantial revision of their personally held beliefs.
What does this say about conservative attitudes toward that same public?
Does it imply, 'Fortunately, an enlightened populace seeking a balanced viewpoint rejects this sort of claptrap out of hand'?
Or, 'Luckily, sweet impartial reason, filled to bursting with informed oversight nips this communistic drivel in the bud'?
No, it does not.
It says...'You, the public, are too stupid and consumerly to analyze and filter anything past horoscopes and The Family Circus.
Thus, we must drive our talking point home before our opponents do, over and over, again and again, until you accept our filter on your subjective perception and adopt our viewpoint as your own - Because you are sheep in need of a shepherd, and we are shepherds in need of fleece and lambchops.'
'Let us think for you, since you are incapable of using your beautiful minds without being swayed by the siren song of the Left.
This is unacceptable to us, and we shall make it unacceptable to you.'
Over 50% of the registered voters in the United States, 62 million people, voted for George Bush in 2004 not because a 'liberal media's web of lies' were so easily seen through and reacted against.
All the facts as we know them today were on the table then...The corruption, the cronyism, the incompetence, the lies that led to war...It was all there, and it wasn't being reported on.
Who benefited from that lack of reportage... exactly?