In case you're keeping score at home, in his post, Darrell is quoting an article from Accuracy In Media (AIM), an organization notorious for its extreme right-wing views.
I'm not saying they're wrong just because they're "righties", just pointing out that this group has consistently claimed that the news media are overwhelmingly biased towards liberal/Democratic views. My opinion is that the mainstream news media are biased towards the status quo, i.e. mostly centrist and supportive of big business interests. A quick look at who contributes to the campaign coffers of whichever party is in power (or both when the gov't is split as is the case now), is sufficient proof that our politicians are bought and paid for by business and private donors. The news media rarely report on this egregious state of affairs, mostly because they see it as a boring story and a turn-off for readers/viewers.
I'm all for having media watchdogs, but AIM are completely missing the point with their constant contention that the news media have a liberal bias. On the contrary, the mainstream media, especially those who cover Washington, D.C., are biased toward corporations, the rich, and the status quo. I would even say the mainstream media have a slight but consistent conservative bias.
Joel Irby
Austin, Texas |
