Replies

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.

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.

The mostly New York based "news" organizations promote policies that enrich the people who own those companies.

That is NOT as simpler explanation, rather, it assumes that all newspaper owners and broadcasters have taken the trouble to invest, secretly, in companies that profit from “liberal” spending policies.
My explanation is that the very business model of the newspaper itself depends on cynicism towards society. I don’t have to assume that the owner of that newspaper has any other business interest apart from the newspaper. I don’t actually have to assume that the owner himself is a “liberal.” He could be a conservative who sincerely objects to “bias in the media” - provided only that he accepts that “the news” as such is what journalists normally report. That is, bad news almost exclusively. Once concede that the only thing that matters to your business is bad news - while claiming that your newspaper is objective - and your conservative newspaper owner can write conservative editorials ’til the cows come home, and still be operating a “liberal” propaganda organization.
In the old days before the AP, newspapers were idiosyncratic - each newspaper was about it’s printer’s opinion. Therefore you wouldn’t want a steady diet of a newspaper whose printer’s politics were anathema to you - but not all newspapers were owned by printers of a single ideology. Now, under the AP paradigm, that is swept away and newspapers are different beasts. In the old days most newspapers were weekly, and some didn’t even have a deadline at all. Now a “real newspaper" prints daily because "the wire” gives an unlimited supply of bad news to report, on the one hand, and OTOH that “wire” is too expensive to be able to afford to pay for it and not use it daily.