The "Liberal" Media

Even if MPR were pandering to liberals, who cares? Conservatives get pandered to by slanted reporting, misrepresentation, and high-volume bluster. Liberals get pandered to by insightful and accurate reporting. Hence, public radio listeners are more informed than consumers of other media.When you pander to liberals, everybody wins. There should be more "liberal bias" in the media.

Come on, Coyote. The most popular program on NPR is two guys who talk about cars."Liberal bias." What a joke! That's never been anything more than a shibboleth in the conservative culture of perpetual victimhood. Conservativism can never fail, it can only be failed, and any time the conservative agenda is blocked it's not because they were wrong, it's because a powerful liberal conspiracy marshaled against them.Don't you guys ever take personal responsibility? No, of course not; it's always someone else who's "delusional."

Well, but that's where you palm the pea, now isn't it? You say "traditional media", where "traditional" means "everything that's not conservative", which allows you to claim that all "traditional media" is "liberal" or moderate, because you've simply defined it that way.I mean, what's not "traditional" about Fox News or CNBC or Joe Scarbourough on MSNBC? What's not "traditional" about the Washington Post or the Wall Street Journal? What's not "traditional" about Ross Doubthat's column in the New York Times or Clarence Page's in the Chicago Tribune? What's not "traditional" about the National Review, founded by William F. Buckley Jr. more than 60 years ago? What's not "traditional" about former NPR contributor Juan Williams?What's not "traditional" about the hundreds of prominent conservatives in the media? That they're not liberals? Doesn't that make your complaint completely circular? Wow, yeah, it turns out when you only interview liberals about their voting preferences, they tend to vote Democratic. I almost fell out of my seat!

No, actually, at the White House Correspondent's Dinner, during the Bush Administration.

That elides those figures in the media that don't vote at all. Moreover, it's not immediately clear that voting patterns are a reliable guide to actual bias; why would it be a form of bias, for instance, for sports writers to primarily vote Democratic? Style-section reporters? Financial analysts?Even if voting patterns were indicative of bias in political reporting, why would it matter to other subjects?And are you going to respond to the point that by defining the "traditional media" as "non-conservative journalists", you're simply assuming what you intend to prove?