Tim, re: "Unlikely, [that media bias would change if the Republicans ideas were more compelling] its ingrained in to the culture of the press and journalism schools, and it persists whatever the strengths of the arguments or candidates at any given time. Even when Republicans are winning overwhelmingly, the press tends to support Democrats more. And whatever the level of overall average support for each party of for conservative or liberal ideas in general the press and network news is always well to the left of the general population, or the population of college graduates."
I think the best counter to that assertion is to look at what has happened with many of our educated commentators who possessed a strong bias but who've changed their bias based on compellingly good ideas.
I'm talking about David Brooks, Buckley, George Will, and many others who, if not Obama supporters, are certainly leaning toward Obama.
These are people who've for years carried water for Bush/Cheney, reluctantly, because of party affiliation and bias but who now are now being persuaded by ideas and a candidate that they admire.
And surely you saw the press move right in 2000 when W presented himself as a new breed of humble, compassionate Republicans? How do you explain that if not as an example of media bias changing based on more compelling ideas?
Can't you accept that their perceived "bias" might simply be a thoughtful and informed rejection of archaic and rigid policies that are repugnant to those who see things more clearly?
As I stated, if you want to win over the bias of the press, get some better ideas. Ed |
