Replies

We are in full agreement on the problems of Gannett. I understand why the Pulliam family sold — financially, they probably made the right decision, but who could have known that before the 2008 media collapse — and I hope a few years from now, some of the Pulliam family members decide to use the money they earned from their company's sale to fund conservative online news operations. Right now, however, anything in the media is a bad investment, financially speaking.

Also, there's no question that this article was reviewed in detail by the editors in advance, and possibly by the publisher. Many publishers take a deliberate hands-off approach to news content, however, so I can't say that for sure. Often it's best for publishers to be able to say to angry advertisers that they knew nothing about the article in advance. But if the publisher wasn't involved before the article ran, the publisher and the corporate chain of command definitely are involved now, and they have a crisis on their hands.

I do, however, think that many reporters live in a world which is so isolated from conservatives that the editors may not have understood what kind of uproar this would produce. I've spent a lot of time on professional journalism websites since this article appeared trying to make calm and reasonable arguments that there was no journalistic justification for printing this list, and the general response in public and especially in private comments has been along the line of “You know, we never considered that point of view before.”

I think I have been somewhat effective. This article really did not meet the test of being a compelling public interest, and an excellent case can be made from a women's rights (i.e., liberal) perspective that publishing this article caused direct harm to female victims of domestic violence who were relying on the element of surprise as well as their ownership of a gun for their protection. Those two arguments seem to be quite effective in winning people over who may not agree with conservatives on other issues.

“Groupthink” is more of a problem in the media than deliberate and intentional liberalism. I know one large newsroom in a fairly conservative part of Iowa where the only outspoken conservative is a sports reporter, and that indicates the depth of the problem.

Most people on Free Republic are quite aware of what liberals think. By contrast, many liberals don't even know what conservatives think, let alone understand us.

The result is that liberals sometimes seriously overreach and do things that are really stupid because they don't understand how much anger they will generate from those who disagree with them.