It has become conventional belief that the media is supposed to be objective. Yet objectivity is unattainable. By choosing which part of a story to emphasize, which sources to use, and the order of the stories, media organizations exhibit bias.
Even news people who say they are conservative or liberal emerge, when you talk to them, as wishy-washy about their ideological leanings. The truth is that, whether in the media or the public as a whole, not everybody is political.
We've created this cottage industry in which it pays to be un-objective. It pays to be subjective as much as possible. It's a great way to have your cake and eat it too. Criticize other people for not being objective.
The trouble for Newt is that the victim strategy has no exit strategy. Having embarked on the trail of "You started it, Mitt"/"you're a big bully, Mitt," Newt hasd to project his own massive flaws onto others ever more hyperbolically.
Do traditional news outlets falter? Of course they do, all the time. And opinion does color the facts. But that is certainly no excuse to choose to expose yourself only to the work of journalists who you know share your political inclinations.
The "Tell the Truth" campaign is less about truth-telling and more about bullying the media into promoting right-wing talking points. The MRC doesn't really want a balanced media. It wants a slavishly right-wing media.
At least in Colorado, it's officially a force to be reckoned with, which should be as alarming for Reaganfeller Republicans -- those who talk like Ronald Reagan but think and vote like Nelson Rockefeller -- as it is for liberal Democrats.
If the liberal media is so strong, as the right claims it to be, then how come all of the liberals in the country don't have as much influence as just Glenn Beck? That's really painful to write, but clearly true.