Posted on 05/25/2004 5:31:25 AM PDT by shortstop
Of course reporters are more liberal than other Americans, we all know that.
What we don’t know is why.
Though I’ve got some theories.
First, the numbers. A study by the Pew Research Center this weeks shows that national reporters – TV, radio and newspaper – self-identify as liberals 34 percent of the time and as conservatives 7 percent of the time.
Most say they are moderates, but 34 percent say they are liberals and 7 percent say they are conservatives.
Which is way out of sync with the rest of us.
Among Americans in general, 20 percent of us say we’re liberal and 33 percent of us say we’re conservative. So, if you do the math, liberals are almost 75 percent more common in the media than they are in society, and conservatives are almost 80 percent less common in the media than they are in society.
Translation: When America looks at the news media, it doesn’t see itself. It sees a population that is heavily skewed, philosophically, away the main stream.
The news business nationally is far more welcoming to liberals than society in general, and far more hostile to conservatives.
Why is that?
Well, discrimination is part of it.
Like likes like, and liberal bosses and liberal news organizations tend to hire people who reflect their thinking and worldview. People who do not – conservatives – don’t tend to be hired. If the difference was skin color, we’d have the Justice Department all over this. But because it’s only philosophy, nobody even bats an eye.
In effect, liberals have “taken over” the news business in percentages dramatically out of proportion to their representation in society. And their liberalism does not only apply to politics. It also relates to religion.
For example, among journalists, less than 15 percent believe that faith in God is a necessary part of being a “moral person.” Among the American population, however, the number is 60 percent. Americans in general are four times more likely to value religion as a part of personal morality than are journalists.
Simply put, the people in the newsroom are very different from the people on Main Street. And yet the people in the newsroom, with a minority viewpoint, daily pass judgment on the people and events of Main Street.
No wonder so much of the news is negative and condemning. No wonder it seems so hostile to society – it is reported by people who are on the fringe of society.
Part of the reason for this is education.
About a quarter of adult Americans have a bachelor’s degree. More than 95 percent of reporters, by some estimates, have a bachelor’s degree. That makes them more educated, and more brainwashed. The American university is the missionary field of the liberal movement, and it graduates converts every spring.
Another reason is American journalism’s worship of diversity. The news business, particularly in the giant media companies, is driven by multiculturalism and diversity. Not merely of racial minorities, but of lifestyle and religious minorities. And though these workers are recruited and promoted in the name of diversity, it is seldom more than tokenism. They are welcome, but they must parrot the company line. It’s great to have a different skin color or lifestyle, but don’t you dare have a different point of view. The diverse people are all the same -- political liberals.>p>
They may be racially or socially diverse, but they are philosophically monolithic.
And that is what daunts America.
That is what disserves America.
Because while the American press is free, it is not trusted. And that makes it useless. The free press has been hobbled not by government censorship, but by its own perversion. It has been taken over and subverted.
So what do we do?
The news remains useful and informative. You can’t intelligently boycott it. But neither should you uncritically accept it. The answer to this adulteration of the news business is, ironically, not to use it less, but to use it more.
With the Internet and cable or satellite television, an incredible number of news sources are available. Different versions of the same story can be accessed, to sift out the truth. And primary sources – like government documents and entire press conferences or interviews – are available, removing the filter of reporter interpretation.
With modern technology, those who are interested in the news can sidestep the news organizations. It is often possible to witness or read things directly. You watch it, you decide.
For now, that is the solution.
Possibly someday there will be a revolution of the American media, and a return to the honesty of traditional journalism. But that’s not apt to happen soon.
In the short term, all we can expect is more of the same. The discrimination that keeps conservatives out of the news business will continue, and the rift between Americans and American journalism will grow ever wider.
Over 90% of the media is liberal. This study is bogus.
Ever met any journalism students?
Every one that I have ever met went into it with the idea that America is a terrible, corrupt place and that their job would be to expose this!
They were liberal idealogues BEFORE they began their missions.
There is more to it than that. The major news coalition, ie: networks, major newspaper chains, all get their stories from the same sources, hence; "managed" news. Fortunately, there are some conservative (read: Truth) news outlets. My favorite, and one which I heartily recommend is; The New American. Check it out on their website; www.tna.com subscription price for a year is only $39.00 (26 issues). Then you can get the the truth and the whole story, so you won't have to subject yourself to the "Nightly Diatribe".
What a stupid statement. Are we to believe that everyone who graduates from college with a bachelor's degree has somehow been brainwashed into a liberal?
My opinion is more credible. Being called liberal is very bad and most journalists will not tell you that they are liberal. However it does snot take a genius to figure out that over 90% of journalist are liberal and they vote Democrat.
As a DU troll, your days may be numbered on this site.
Every one that I have ever met went into it with the idea that America is a terrible, corrupt place and that their job would be to expose this!
This has some truth to it, as most professors in today's journalism schools came of age during and made their bones in the Watergate era, if not slightly after it. Instinctively they do not trust the government, though I submit that instinctively, no good journalist should trust any source.
You'd be surprised how often leftists say the media can't be liberal because corporations run them.
Utter insanity.
Brainwashing is not a guaranteed effect. If you attempt to brainwash everyone, some may be brainwashed while others will see through your attempt, or simply be unaffected. Therefor, if we agree that American universities attempt to brainwash students into liberal politics, then a group which is more exposed will likely be more greatly affected.
Not that I agree with the entire concept, but it does make logical sense. I think the more plausible culprit is the fly on crap analogy. That is, liberals want to be journalists because they believe it is a sacred profession. One would expect pious persons to enter the church, and likewise one would expect liberals to enter journalism.
"I wonder which is more credible, your opinion or this study?"
You wonder because you are clueless and stupid. You submit a 'study' pushed by the notorious left-wing front FAIR as evidence that the media is not leftist. Please read the bio of FAIR's founder here:
http://www.fair.org/extra/writers/cohen.html
No doubt PRAVDA considers itself fair and balanced as well. FAIR exists only to combat the original, and far more compelling research of the MEDIA RESEARCH CENTER, found here:
http://www.mrc.org
For starters, do a little google search (once you are booted off FR and have the time) and look up the TIME magazine article in which nearly 80% of White House correspondents identified themselves as left of center. Then, my kitty-toasted butt monkey, ask yourself if you would consider it a problem if 80% of our national 'eyes and ears' in the national press club in Washington were members of the Nazi Party (well, technically the Nazi's are socialists so I suppose that diminishes my point somewhat).
Take a hike.
I disagree. I believe writers want to be journalists; writers, in general, are more liberal than non-writers; ergo, journalists tend to be more liberal than non-journalists.
If you participate here, you will be insulted.
Well, could be, but I think we are barking up opposite sides of the same tree.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.