«
»

Liberal journalists donate to Democrats over Republicans 100 to 1

Posted 24 Jul 2008 in liberals, media bias

Ok, it’s official. I don’t want to hear ANY more complaints from Democrats about Republicans’ preference for Fox News. Investor’s Business Daily follows journalists’ prejudice via their campaign contributions in a new editorial this week.

Putting Money Where Mouths Are: Media Donations Favor Dems 100-1

money-trailThe New York Times’ refusal to publish John McCain’s rebuttal to Barack Obama’s Iraq op-ed may be the most glaring example of liberal media bias this journalist has ever seen. But true proof of widespread media bias requires one to follow an old journalism maxim: Follow the money.

Even the Associated Press — no bastion of conservatism — has considered, at least superficially, the media’s favoritism for Barack Obama. It’s time to revisit media bias.

True to form, journalists are defending their bias by saying that one candidate, Obama, is more newsworthy than the other. In other words, there is no media bias. It is we, the hoi polloi, who reveal our bias by questioning the neutrality of these learned professionals in their ivory-towered newsrooms.

There’s a lot more. But it’s not too lengthy and it’s pretty good (especially the part detailing some of Obama’s hypocrisy regarding PAC money). Read the whole thing.

No wonder, as Jonathan Martin opines, the GOP is losing the new-media war.

But the left isn’t simply promoting its own version of the news — it’s also breaking it.

Deploying writers with backgrounds grounded in journalism rather than politics, The Huffington Post and Talking Points Memo, in particular, have already become a persistent problem for McCain’s campaign, regularly posting negative opposition research and embarrassing videos in addition to advancing damaging story lines against the GOP nominee.

There is simply no equivalent on the right to these two liberal-leaning websites.
[...]
Add in the increasingly aggressive online efforts of liberal think tanks such as the Center for American Progress, and it leaves the right at a severe disadvantage in the high-stakes business of distributing information about favored candidates and the opposition.
[...]
“In the past 60 years, only one employee of the National Review, Weekly Standard or any conservative magazine has actually been hired as a reporter for a newspaper,” says Brooks, who researched the question a few years ago.

At the same time, scores of young reporters from liberal-leaning journals such as The New Republic or The Washington Monthly have been called up to the journalistic big leagues by general interest newspapers and magazines.

“There is just no career line for a conservative reporter,” observes Brooks.

Further, prominent conservatives such as Rush Limbaugh and Michelle Malkin have prospered by seizing upon the sense of grievance conservatives have felt toward the mainstream media.

Liberals, on the other hand, responded to their own disenchantment with the media and the Bush era by channeling their anger into the creation of parallel reporting outlets geared toward doing what old-line news outlets purportedly weren’t doing.

(Yeah, The New York Times is a regular paragon of objectivity.)

While there is no real national site, Erick Erickson, founder of the popular RedState, points out that there is some reporting taking place on conservative blogs in Minnesota and Colorado.
…
But for now, Erickson concedes that most potential angel funders are hesitant to bankroll a start-up, still gun-shy after many websites have flopped and skeptical that a right-wing version of HuffPo or TPM would be taken seriously by established media organs.

Gee, I can’t imagine why conservative reporters are having a hard time gaining traction in established media outlets?

Posted by FullMetalPatriot
12th gen. American, Constitutionalist, Harley-riding Texan, gun owner & NRA member, blogger, illustrator, Florida Gator alumnus. #TCOT

Leave A Comment