[conservatism_IS_compassion]

This is dangerous. When the MSM becomes a mouthpiece for a constituency (the democratic party in particular), we lose perspective and objectivity, the two most important elements to any story.

It is time and past time that we accepted the obvious. Anyone who argues from the premise of his own objectivity is arrogant.

And that includes anyone who merely insinuates that by joining a mutual-admiration society of journalists and claims that I am wrong because I disagree with a journalist. Journalists have their rules, such as "If it bleeds, it leads," and such rules have obvious utility in making a newspaper profitable. But where is it written that what makes a newspaper profitable is good for the country?

"Gasp! Horror! Blasphemy! The First Amendment says so!"

Wrong. . The First Amendment merely states that everyone equally has the right to their own opinions - and the right to speak and (within the limits of their own pocketbook) to publish those opinions. The First Amendment doesn't even mention newspapers, though it clearly does include them, and it certainly does not say that The Washington Post or The New York Times - or CBS or any of the alphabet soup - is necessary. Only that it is not right for the government to control your publishing and speech, or mine.

Procedures which make journalism profitable are not justified merely because they make journalism possible; they are justified only by the fact that the government may not, under constitutional principles, rightfully prevent them. So if a journalist justifies reporting only the casualties and not the accomplishments of the military on the basis of "If it bleeds, it leads" my answer is simply a yawn. That is the self-interest of the journalist, not my interest or the public interest.

We-the-people simply have to absorb the fact that journalism is a self-interested activity, and that no part of its behavior is more self-interested than its claim of its own objectivity.

Why Broadcast Journalism is
Unnecessary and Illegitimate

[E.G.C.]

Media bias bump.

[bubman]

I agree however it doesn't explain why the MSM tilts to the left and call it objective journalism. One surely can tilt to the right under the same medium and achieve a greater audience given that Americans consider themselves more conservative on issues than liberal. I would hazard the reason why the MSM tilt to the left is because they have somehow taken upon themselves to be the "guardians" of the disenfranchised, voice of the voiceless and all that crap. It is elitism mascarading as social consciousness. Hell they are the offshoot of years at liberal colleges and with the supposed arrogance that their diplomas offers to presume to be arbitrators of truth, justice and the american way. They live in an echo chamber pure and simple.

Like Bernard Goldberg said; the place where you will find the least diversity is in the newsrooms of america! And that's the way it is.

cheers