Journalists are celebrities.
Whoever says something which flatters a journalist will therefore get good PR in return.
The thing which most flatters the journalist is to be called objective.
Easy, when a democratic government has the power to control property, all it takes to control the marketplace is to manipulate public opinion. Control of communications media to consolidate political forces becomes the means to control the factors of production and the key to the control of wealth.Yes, but why is it necessary to do studies proving the existence of "bias in the media" even to some conservatives? The government censorship is never over except in ways--FCC in particular--generally but thoughtlessly considered benign.There's a reason they call it, "our democracy."
Easy, when a democratic government has the power to control property, all it takes to control the marketplace is to manipulate public opinion. Control of communications media to consolidate political forces becomes the means to control the factors of production and the key to the control of wealth.Yes, but why is it necessary to do studies proving the existence of "bias in the media" even to some conservatives? The government censorship is never overt except in ways--the FCC in particular--generally but thoughtlessly considered benign.There's a reason they call it, "our democracy."
Journalists are celebrities. Like movie stars, they are not expert in the scientific controversies surrounding global warming and so forth. But all celebrities are expert in one thing: knowing what is the safe thing to say.
Whoever says something which flatters the profession of journalism will get good PR in return. And the thing which most flatters the journalist is to be called objective. In the world of celebrity, the "intellectual competition" is over who can flatter the rest of the world of celebrity most subtly.