In Search of Truth: We Must Rewind
| By vitality - Feb 1st, 2006 at 10:10 am EST |
The following is in response to a recent editorial in The Weekly Standard which suggest that liberal bias rules the planet while conservative bias simply does not exist. I emailed the following response to my local paper--the radically conservative Mobile Register--as well as to politicians from within the state.
In regards to the authors main point that there is such a great divide between fair and objective media, I asked him the following :
What's so outrageous about this?
If anyone--left or right will finally step backwards--after our very own president "admits" to being wrong, shouldn't we then abandon common revisionist theory, that not only has what the President said been fiercely disputed from the rest of the world but that hundreds of Intelligence employees that have worked more for Republican Presidents than Democrat ones, continue to take some responsibility for what occurred--that being, "trusting and listening to the President re-interprate, re-write and re-configure our democracy and Constitution.
This administration--and mainstream media pundits--were they interested in the truth, need to realize that they helped decieve America as well. Remarkably, there still remains a chorus of pundits who continue to re-broadcast Talking Points of the administration (payola)no matter how indisputably wrong they are and continue to be.
Fox News and MSNBC(not Olbermann's great show, Countdown"), have not only created a foundation that is too fragile, weak and illusory but continues to do so without correction. When ones foundations is itself fragile, weak and illusory, it's impossible for political policies to gain momentum when they are based on something that has been proven to be completely erroneous to begin with. In short: When the weight of truth does collapse due to pretentious and misleading assumptions--pundits will immediately look at the smoldering debris...and do what they always do....blame the Democrats for their very own hubris and ignorance.
Chris Matthews is dangerous because he is supposed to be objective and he is not. Even a cursory look at Media Matters for America will detail this without confliction. The amazing irony is that we have a President who has refused to meet with the media, to give them anything at all, to continually mislead them and manage them.
What's just as amazing is that given the effect of tax cuts upon less than 1% of the population, not the diminishing Middle Class, Bush offers this proposal at a time where foreign debt, trade debt, deficit, etc. has been so outrageously managed by the Republican Congress that there is no money left to even pretend with. These tax cuts will benefit some Americans no doubt. However, it is the upper 1% that benefits at the expense of the majority. Where do you think every single one of the mainstream media shareholders happen to be.
Given the uproar over CBS and Dan Rather, one would certainly be misled if they seriously believed that this criticism exists because Fox News is interested in and representative of anything approaching reality.
But the real danger is obvious. Look at what MSNBC is doing. Joe Scarborough, Rita Crosby, Chris Matthews, Tucker Carlson vs. Keith Olbermann. On this point, Fox news is correct. MSNBC is Fox-lite. And without any integrity whatsoever, it's a fact that the only pundit with enough courage to actually respond to O'Reilly and others is precisely the one who stands alone in this battle because of partisanship from his "colleagues".
You say liberal bias, I say take up my challenge. For one week, I'll watch Fox News or MSNBC and report every single misconception they have, while I ask you to do the same.
In the end, let's put our money where our mouth is and instead of speculation, we'll be forced to provide clarity. Guess what. I'm not holding my breath.
In regards to the authors main point that there is such a great divide between fair and objective media, I asked him the following :
What's so outrageous about this?
If anyone--left or right will finally step backwards--after our very own president "admits" to being wrong, shouldn't we then abandon common revisionist theory, that not only has what the President said been fiercely disputed from the rest of the world but that hundreds of Intelligence employees that have worked more for Republican Presidents than Democrat ones, continue to take some responsibility for what occurred--that being, "trusting and listening to the President re-interprate, re-write and re-configure our democracy and Constitution.
This administration--and mainstream media pundits--were they interested in the truth, need to realize that they helped decieve America as well. Remarkably, there still remains a chorus of pundits who continue to re-broadcast Talking Points of the administration (payola)no matter how indisputably wrong they are and continue to be.
Fox News and MSNBC(not Olbermann's great show, Countdown"), have not only created a foundation that is too fragile, weak and illusory but continues to do so without correction. When ones foundations is itself fragile, weak and illusory, it's impossible for political policies to gain momentum when they are based on something that has been proven to be completely erroneous to begin with. In short: When the weight of truth does collapse due to pretentious and misleading assumptions--pundits will immediately look at the smoldering debris...and do what they always do....blame the Democrats for their very own hubris and ignorance.
Chris Matthews is dangerous because he is supposed to be objective and he is not. Even a cursory look at Media Matters for America will detail this without confliction. The amazing irony is that we have a President who has refused to meet with the media, to give them anything at all, to continually mislead them and manage them.
What's just as amazing is that given the effect of tax cuts upon less than 1% of the population, not the diminishing Middle Class, Bush offers this proposal at a time where foreign debt, trade debt, deficit, etc. has been so outrageously managed by the Republican Congress that there is no money left to even pretend with. These tax cuts will benefit some Americans no doubt. However, it is the upper 1% that benefits at the expense of the majority. Where do you think every single one of the mainstream media shareholders happen to be.
Given the uproar over CBS and Dan Rather, one would certainly be misled if they seriously believed that this criticism exists because Fox News is interested in and representative of anything approaching reality.
But the real danger is obvious. Look at what MSNBC is doing. Joe Scarborough, Rita Crosby, Chris Matthews, Tucker Carlson vs. Keith Olbermann. On this point, Fox news is correct. MSNBC is Fox-lite. And without any integrity whatsoever, it's a fact that the only pundit with enough courage to actually respond to O'Reilly and others is precisely the one who stands alone in this battle because of partisanship from his "colleagues".
You say liberal bias, I say take up my challenge. For one week, I'll watch Fox News or MSNBC and report every single misconception they have, while I ask you to do the same.
In the end, let's put our money where our mouth is and instead of speculation, we'll be forced to provide clarity. Guess what. I'm not holding my breath.
!
Comments are closed for this post.
Link
Media Matters already does this! Subscribe to their mailing list, and let them do the work for you. . . or become a contributor!
I didn't qualify it correctly.
Before I posted upon this blog, I'd already written a response to the Weekly Standard piece via yahoo message boards. The reason I brought up Media Matters, etc. is because much of the past responses and the makeup of those responding to these pieces will continually be left in the dark so long as Chris Matthews and others perpetually declare Democrats as spineless and uninspiring.
I cannot remember how many times I've sent--via email-- responses to Matthews depiction of Democrats. I've supplied them with those links such as Media Matters for America, as well as many others such as Center for American Progress, etc.
Because of this, I wanted to perhaps encourage those on the fence towards our direction. The best way to do so in my opinion is to engage them. The most important thing of all is not to preach to the choir as so many have done in the past.
I appreciate your comments very much,
Justin