I've been itching to write about this for a while, but work has had me busier than a two-bit French whor...
How is it that the Left
is always barking about how fair and balanced the media is when this kind of shit is happening?
Not that it is anything new, of course, but it still chaps my ass that those low-life at The Star,
among others, are mentioned as endorsing Kerry. How is it, exactly, that a paper, or any medium for that matter, is NOT biased, but STILL MANAGES TO STICK THEIR COLLECTIVE FOOT IN THEIR MOUTH BY ENDORSING A CANDIDATE, ANY CANDIDATE?
I guess it is my sense of keeping the news as much to an ideal of a stream-of-information as possible that has raised my ire, as much as anything. Openly endorsing a candidate isn't so much the problem as the lack of sincerity on the part of the media organizations to openly admit that they have a partisan political agenda. THAT
I can manage.
This, to me, makes all the difference in the world, as regular folks have long ago figured this out
, I believe, and came to the conclusion that there were other means by which to counter the leanings of the biased media.
One of those things that developed, to no one's surprise, was soft money. Gee, who'd a thunk?
So the papers have shown an allegiance, one way or another, I don't care which, and the rest of the media, whether explicitly or implicitly, has the same character. What is an average Joe to do?
Let's all say it together...I'll give some cash to my political cause.
Wait, enter John McCain and his Henchmen, who have had the brilliance to not only recognize this soft money debacle, but have the magic solution to the problem, the McCain-Feingold Act-to-forever muddy-up-even-further-the-political-discourse-of-Amercia-by-getting-all-the-dirty-money-removed blah, blah, blah...
Please excuse my digression, I couldn't help myself.
So, why is it that a newspaper can't keep an unbiased position about politics?
Probably has to do with the nature of people, I suppose. People have varying opinions about a variety of topics. An open discussion of which is usually considered a good thing. Some people are religious. Some are not. Some are conservative with their behavior, while others are loose. Some have liberal leanings when others have more rigid ones. None of these things have a right or wrong to them. They are merely different positions on the same plane, that is all.
That is to say, we each have preferences
, which are a result of having a great breadth of personal liberty with which to exercise those positions. It is this gravitation to a particular position, and learning about it in more depth that allows individual growth, and affirmation of that position is crucial to achieving it. Reading, listening and absorbing a particular position is nice to have, but only if it can be tempered with opposing points of view. Without that crucial counterpoint, or where ideas thrive - multiple counterpoint, perspective is impossible
Which brings me back to my original thought about news organizations needing to openly admit their political leanings, and report whatever position, to whatever audience they choose. It is human nature to be partial, of that I have no question.
But, for God's-sake, just come out and say it!