Goldberg runs interference like Medved and others to de-legitimize the idea that their exists a coordinated “power behind the throne” orchestrating events. The question always posed is what group and prove it; and if one cannot do this in two or three succinct statements they are a crazy wacko birds. I can agree with many things people like Goldberg say in their writings but they leave out or confine the realms of discussion much like spiking a story and or controlling the bookends or parameters thus serving to obfuscate or poison the well as far as understanding what’s really going on in the world and America.
The right has its bugaboos, too. For instance, there are many who think the mainstream media is biased (it is) and that its bias is somehow centrally orchestrated like a scheme by some Bond villain (it isn't).”The Mainstream Media” is biased, yes - but that doesn’t begin to cover it. Adam Smith famously asserted thatPeople of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary. - Adam Smith, Wealth of NationsThe mere fact that members of “the mainstream media” read/listen to each other would be sufficient to qualify them as “meeting together” - not for merriment or diversion, but precisely about business. But in fact all of “the mainstream media” are associated, via their common membership in the Associated Press. And that has been continuously true for over a century and a half. The only question, then, is, “What motives do the members of the AP share which are distinct from the public interest?” Identify that, and you can explain the particular way in which the membership of the AP conspires against the public.We know of the “bias in the media” as a "left wing" phenomenon. But what is “left wing,” anyway? I put it to you that the defining characteristic of "the MSM” is that its membership doesn’t do anything, it talks about others doing things. Theodore Roosevelt famously defined the public interest when he said, “It is not the critic who counts . . . the credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena” getting things done, or at least trying to. As illustrated by Liz Warren’s formulation, “If you have a business, you didn’t build that,” the idea that the critic and not the doer is the one who counts is precisely the leftist conceit.
The “bias” in “the mainstream media” is its role in promoting the members of the AP and the “liberals”/“progressives” (call them what you will, I like “Grubercrats” myself) in an intensive go-along-and-get-along campaign against “the man in the arena.” There may not be any one single “Mr. Big” in charge. But that does not mean there is no conspiracy. There is. Members of the AP are so completely absorbed into the Borg that they lose all consciousness of the fact that the Borg even exists.