[count-your-change]

“I am saying that an “objective” journalism will always be an anti conservative journalism, and that a conservative voice must be an explicitly, and can be unapologetically, conservative.”

At one time newspapers were recognized for what they are...a vehicle to carry the owner/publishers opinion and the pseudo objectivity of the Journalism Schools unknown.

Can you imagine Hearst being “objective “ about his stories and competitors? hardly, but he did have a clarity of purpose that obvious to all....money.

Todays papers have no real idea why they exist, pretend to be objective and are going broke.

“We all know the problem called “bias in the media;” what to do about it is the topic of this thread”

Hence my suggestion that conservatives buy one of the failing papers. Make it a sort of Rush Limbaugh and FR in print. And it would be that “conservative voice must be an explicitly, and can be unapologetically, conservative”.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

“We all know the problem called “bias in the media;” what to do about it is the topic of this thread”

Hence my suggestion that conservatives buy one of the failing papers. Make it a sort of Rush Limbaugh and FR in print. And it would be that “conservative voice must be an explicitly, and can be unapologetically, conservative”.

Right. But, being conservative and thus minimizing superficiality, it could have a less urgent deadline - most of the early newspapers were weeklies. And some had no deadline at all, and just went to press when the printer was good and ready.

But I’m just not sure you are then talking about a “news”paper. Do you buy a paper belonging to the AP? That’s how you get the cornucopia of news stories - but then, those stories have the pseudo-objective slant which is actually left wing.