And although O'Sullivan himself gives some examples as a lame "proof," his law is demonstrably true. My proof follows:
- Journalism is negative (if it bleeds, it leads)
- Journalism is superficial (because of deadline pressure)
- Journalism is arrogant (in claiming the virtue of objectivity, and also in its belief that "you never get into an argument with someone who buys ink by the truckload").
- Journalism is cowardly (in that each journalist fears all the others - taking the "you never get into an argument with someone who buys ink by the truckload" warning to heart when journalism in general needs to be opposed by a courageous voice.
- It follows that journalism is cynical and bullying.
- It follows that any organization or individual such as a SCOTUS justice - which is courageous and principled will be labeled "right wing" - or, perhaps, "out of the mainstream." Anyone who lacks courage and principle will be pulled to conformity with the left wing by the flattery and derision of journalism - and be praised as "moderate' and "mainstream" (and, before they ran the word into the ground, "liberal").
This is my vanity thread, which i've kept going since shortly after 9/11/01 as a way to document the tendentiousness of journalism. Sounds like you might be interested in it . . .