Journalists are liberal by nature. We enter the profession in the hopes of making a difference, bringing about social change, saving the little guy. That often involves taking on the establishment/far right. We do think alike, and we're a close knit group in our communities because we spend much of our day together. That all breeds monovision. But that doesn't negate the fact that we are often "told" how to think by our publishers/editors. Either get in step or find a place where you are a better fit. Or as my boss used to lovingly say, "don't let the door hit you in the behind."
Oh, and TV Sun is a nice little "rag," but it's not a real newspaper, just a public relations arm for the owners. It is better edited than some I've read, however, and if you're looking for nice feature stories, it does a pretty good job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr
It's not even that, in many cases, journalists are intentionally trying to mislead anyone, although there are certainly cases where they are.
But many of them are of a certain political bent. Many have very strong leanings to the point where it effects everything they write. They come at every story from a specific prospective. Often they simply assume that their particular beliefs are a given and all discussion beings with those givens.
There's an often told story about a long time White House correspondent. I'll say here that this story has been disputed and some say that it never happened, but whether or not it did, it is illustrative of the way many reporters approach their job.
The story takes place shortly after Richard Nixon won re-election in a landslide. This particular White House correspondent was talking a a party and said, "I can't understand how Nixon possibly could have won. I don't know a single person that voted for him."
When everyone that this reporter knows is of the same political bent, it is difficult for her to be objective about any subject. When there are 50 reporters all in a room together and every one of them has the same political philosophy, how can they possibly be objective? Again, they simple assume that their position is a given and that every one int he world agrees with them.
|