Posted on 07/29/2008 3:20:10 AM PDT by rellimpank
Once again the ugly shadow of "media bias" is darkening the otherwise wholesome world of partisan politics.
Actually, media bias is so terrible, so unjust, so despicable, just about everyone wants to be offended by it.
Take, for instance, the recent flap over the New York Times editorial page decision to reject a John McCain op-ed regarding Iraq only a week after running a Barack Obama column on the very same topic.
As the adults among us probably already know, "fairness" is only a fairy tale. So The Times had no obligation to publish an opinion it found objectionable.
Yet, for McCain, the snub worked miracles. Rather than being handed another mind-numbing essay on Iraq policy, Republicans were allowed to come together and protest the liberal media's refusal to publish an op-ed none of them would have taken the time to read in the first place.
(Excerpt) Read more at denverpost.com ...
“....Republicans were allowed to come together and protest the liberal media’s refusal to publish an op-ed none of them would have taken the time to read in the first place.”
Were we “allowed” to read this article? What’s with this “allowed” bit?
I know I’d have read McCains op-ed even in the NYT.
An article about media bias that is in itself biased. What are the odds?
These guys got it wrong... The latest study says that the media is excessively critical of Obama, and gives McCain too much slack.
Of course, that’s a completely unbiased study...
The old media has noticed that large numbers of people are catching on to their M.O. This knowledge adds an overlay of whiny peevishness to their relentless cheerleading for Democrats.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.