People 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 NationsCertainly journalists are "People of the same trade.” Do they "meet together” much? Only continuously, via the AP newswire. They’ve been doing it since memory of living man runneth not to the contrary.The question is, why do journalists conspire to promote “liberalism?” The answer is simple, once seen. The business model of journalism depends on belief in the objectivity of journalism and on journalism’s focus on bad news. “No news is good news” because good news “isn’t news. Why do those two things combine to promote “liberalism?” Because the very idea that “negativity is objectivity" is the very definition of cynicism.
Journalism is cynical towards society but that does not mean that it is cynical towards government. To the contrary, since skepticism toward society is the very raison d’être of government, cynicism toward society maps to naiveté towards government. Which is precisely the defining combination of socialism.
I have an even simpler explanation. The mostly New York based "news" organizations promote policies that enrich the people who own those companies.
The media pushes a liberal slant on everything and censor stories beneficial to conservatives because whomever owns these media companies, benefits greatly from Liberal policies in Government.(especially liberal spending policies)
They therefore work to help liberal people get elected so that liberal policies will keep the Government money spigot flowing.