Your assumptions about people in the media are wildly off the mark. And it's a mistake to lump them all together into the dumbest term in the English language "the media". Every major news org ALWAYS gets input from all of the relevant perspectives. I heard an interview with David Patreus on NPR, he was very critical of the decision to p…
Your assumptions about people in the media are wildly off the mark. And it's a mistake to lump them all together into the dumbest term in the English language "the media". Every major news org ALWAYS gets input from all of the relevant perspectives. I heard an interview with David Patreus on NPR, he was very critical of the decision to pull out. And you get Trump defenders, and Biden defenders and so on. If you think they are only about helping Dems win elections you are simply wrong. For reporters, their motivation is to write big important stories that impress their bosses and colleagues because they want to have a great career. They want to be the next Woodward and Bernstein. Publishers are interested in satisfying shareholders. Editors are about impressing their bosses and colleagues and pleasing the publisher. The narrative you have in your head about "the media" is overly simplistic and just wrong. It's like the home team fans complaining that the refs have it in for their team.
I'm sure many of them do boast of being liberal. But what definition of liberal are they using? In a true sense being liberal means trying to be open-minded enough to see any situation from the point of view of others. (Not that anyone can ever do this perfectly.) Conservatives tend to think that their way of seeing things is the way the world really is, and everyone else is just wrong. I think this is why journalists tend to be liberals. And I still maintain that most of the people in "the media" are thinking first and foremost about their careers; not their political agenda.
Your assumptions about people in the media are wildly off the mark. And it's a mistake to lump them all together into the dumbest term in the English language "the media". Every major news org ALWAYS gets input from all of the relevant perspectives. I heard an interview with David Patreus on NPR, he was very critical of the decision to pull out. And you get Trump defenders, and Biden defenders and so on. If you think they are only about helping Dems win elections you are simply wrong. For reporters, their motivation is to write big important stories that impress their bosses and colleagues because they want to have a great career. They want to be the next Woodward and Bernstein. Publishers are interested in satisfying shareholders. Editors are about impressing their bosses and colleagues and pleasing the publisher. The narrative you have in your head about "the media" is overly simplistic and just wrong. It's like the home team fans complaining that the refs have it in for their team.
I'm sure many of them do boast of being liberal. But what definition of liberal are they using? In a true sense being liberal means trying to be open-minded enough to see any situation from the point of view of others. (Not that anyone can ever do this perfectly.) Conservatives tend to think that their way of seeing things is the way the world really is, and everyone else is just wrong. I think this is why journalists tend to be liberals. And I still maintain that most of the people in "the media" are thinking first and foremost about their careers; not their political agenda.