RE: "As for the "liberal" media thats mostly a myth anyway."
No, not at all. It's mostly been true, if changing. Face it, if you don't consider Limbaugh as mainstream, and I'm sure you don't, the media is objectively liberal. You know the routine, and it's true. Going back in time, about 80+% of everyone from the top down in the "mainstream" media I grew up with pre-limbaugh, was an admitted liberal or Democrat, and percentages like that still hold true at those networks and newer networks to boot. Liberal media employees slanted the "mainstream" news to the left for decades, and continue to do so.
Along came Limbaugh, causing the Right to be both astounded and overjoyed that someone, anyone, is allowed to have the airtime to express something of the point of view of the right, and naturally he becomes very popular (not to belittle the fact that his personality and humor is a big part of his success). Liberals from their perch built of the past, cry foul. This would be fair turnabout if only it weren't true that the mainstream has been mainly liberal in fact. Only a liberal ignoring objective evidence could possibly deny that old media companies were mostly and largely remain, biased to the left.
You might accept that when it comes to the notion of a pro-war bias for the Iraq conflict, it was certainly a two party bias for war which prevailed. Had Democrats been against it, the old guard mainstream would have shared and pushed their view at the start. But Democrats were in fact in agreement with action in Iraq. This is true, and fully explains why I say it is not such a terrible surprise that the liberal mind changed, but it is a crock that the liberal mind attempts to solely blame Bush and "neocons" for something liberals themselves in the main felt was appropriate in the first place, not just media and/or Bush.
Dan B. |
