Replies

OAN, Fox News (sometimes), Lifezette, Free Republic and others are living proof that if you build it Conservatives will come.

I always liked Snow White because animals loved her. Now Cosmo and social justice warriors insist that Disney characters’ most important quality is their skin color.

A "Snow White" and a "Cinderella" at our Hallowe'en party were both Korean. Out in the real world, nobody says a child is the "wrong race" to be Snow White. They say, "Oh, you look adorable!" and give her candy.

...young Black women who had waited decades to see themselves represented...

I was wondering why certain Congresswomen and news reporters were still acting like 13-year-olds. :)

Just be clear: ”Conservative” “objective” journalism is impossible.
I put scare quotes around “conservative” because American “conservatives” want to conserve liberty - and liberty is not itself conservative. In the 1920s, socialists took over the “liberal” brand; before that time liberalism described us. Our political language has been constructed by socialists, and consequently has a distinct Newspeak quality to it.
The reason you cannot be “conservative” and claim objectivity is the same reason everyone should scorn “liberals” who claim objectivity: it is arrogant to claim a virtue. It is not arrogant to try to attain a virtue, and it is even OK to claim to be trying to attain a virtue (if indeed you are trying).
But there is a fundamental limitation to commercial journalism: you have to make money to survive in business, and you have to attract attention in order to make money. In consequence, you have a strong motive to select and emphasize stories according to the tendency of the public to be unable to ignore them, and not buy your newspaper. And unfortunately what is in the public interest and what interests the public not necessarily, or even usually, the same thing. And you have to interest the public every day.
The need to interest the public motivates rules of journalism, including “Always make your deadline” (with a story, even if in cosmic terms it does not amount to a hill of beans), “‘Man Bites Dog,’ not ‘Dog Bites Man,’” “If it bleeds, it leads,” and “Always claim or insinuate that you - and people who agree with you - are objective, and that no one else is.”
Journalist’s claims of objectivity are arrogant (as noted above) and self-indicting. The claim is self-indicting because

if you know that you are objective, that is tantamount admission that you don’t think you even have to try to be objective - and therefore that you are not even trying to be objective. And,

the negativity implied in “‘Man Bites Dog,’ not ‘Dog Bites Man,’” and “If it bleeds, it leads” rebuts any claim of objectivity unless negativity is objectivity. But “the conceit that negativity is objectivity” is a perfect definition of cynicism.
Journalism which follows standard Journalism 101 rules, therefore, is cynical. And cynicism cannot fall under any definition of “conservatism.”
Cynicism is an antonym for faith, and also for naiveté. But no one can be cynical about everything. For if “A” be the antithesis of “B,” cynicism toward/about “A” cannot but insinuate faith - or at least naiveté - toward/about “B.” As Thomas Paine noted in the opening paragraphs of Common Sense (1776), “society” and “government,” although frequently positioned as being synonyms, are instead essentially antonyms. Standard journalism is cynical about society, and naive at best toward government. And that is an accurate description of “socialism.”