I don’t in fact acknowledge it, because it isn’t true. There is no shortage of slavish support for the Bush Administration in the press and broadcasts in this country, even here in San Francisco. Of course, all things are relative and your definitions of “liberal” and “conservative” might be a little different from mine. Which leads to,

“I don’t want a liberal press or a conservative press, just an unbiased press”

That just isn’t possible in the real world. Far better to have competition in the media — which, by encouraging “consolidation” under giant corporations, supposedly “competitive market” Republicans doing their best to thwart. (If Republicans don’t like the dominance of the current media empires, they have no one but themselves to blame.) I’m not going to defend most local media, which, increasingly being effective monopolies and catering to the lowest common denominator, are indeed appalling. (Write me off line and I’ll tell you the story of visiting my parents in suburban Sacramento and getting a thankfully rare exposure to local TV.) However, the WSJ is widely available anywhere in the country, as is the NYT. Pick your poison and I’ll pick mine — or better, pick both.

— Donald

So I take it that you want a media that is biased toward a liberal point of view, rather than a media that strives to present the truth be it of liberal or conservative bend.

But the fact remains that the media is dominated by the liberal point of view, if you won’t acknowledge that I won’t try to convince you. I think most liberals already know it to be true, but are loath to admit it.

Donald: “I don’t think even the NYT believes that any more.”

Not by that old tired name, no of course not. But we have all heard the voices crying for spending more on the very programs that originated out of the WOP rather than on things like NASA or DOD. And those cries emanate almost exclusively from the liberal wing of the Democrat party.

Donald: “Have you forgotten the Wall Street Journal, whose circulation is comparable to that of the NYT? If the two largest serious papers in the land are relatively conservative and relatively liberal, respectively, that strikes me as “balance.” As I recall, the “liberal” press managed to caugh up a great deal of criticism of the Clinton Administration. And, let us not forget Fox Television.”

And have you forgotten that every major city in the US from Boston to Chicago to Atlanta to Los Angeles has a liberal newspaper? There are not enough “conservative” newspapers to balance them all out. And let us not forget ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC…. Of course Fox News balances all those I suppose??

Donald: “It seems to me, what you and other conservatives want is a monotonal press that toes your philosophy”

No that seems to be what you pined for with your reply of: “If only that were true.”

I don’t want a liberal press or a conservative press, just an unbiased press.

http://www.theeconomist.com

They are conservative, especially on economic issues, but with a far more thoughtful bent than most conservative publications. They are very fact based, backing up much of what they say with actual numbers and detailed charts. They are truly global, including correspondents in most African and Asian countries. They are not afraid to take positions that are unpopular in mainstream conservative thought (e.g., pro gay rights) and they have a sense of humor.

More orginally, rather than try to pretend they are unbiased, they have a “house ideology” (articles are unsigned) and they make no attempt to hide it. You can always interpret what they say from a “fixed point in thought.” They publish some of the best science writing out there (although, unfortunately, they do subscribe to the automated spaceflight is better than human spaceflight myth — but, again, the last thing I want is a journal I always agree with).

They are by far the best written news publication. They give you a detailed history and analysis of a conflict and do it in ten column inches. The only problem is, it takes all week to read, so you’ll never read anything else!

— Donald

On a serious note, its really tough to find anything without a bias. As an Independant, thats moderate on some issues, conservative on others, and liberal on the rest, it really makes it hard to find good sources.

If only that were true.

“who still believe that NASA money could be better spent on “LBJ’s war on poverty”.”

I don’t think even the NYT believes that any more.

Have you forgotten the Wall Street Journal, whose circulation is comparable to that of the NYT? If the two largest serious papers in the land are relatively conservative and relatively liberal, respectively, that strikes me as “balance.” As I recall, the “liberal” press managed to caugh up a great deal of criticism of the Clinton Administration. And, let us not forget Fox Television.

It seems to me, what you and other conservatives want is a monotonal press that toes your philosophy and refuses any critique of the Administration, however minor. That is not what I want even if were my philosophy in question. If that makes me “liberal,” so be it.

— Donald

Nonsense. All I want to see is a press that at least attempts to prevent personal bias from governing how they report the news. The reporter in question and those involved in the smirking/laughter shouldn’t even expect to be taken seriously as journalists.

Since you seem so fond of ‘strawmen’, why don’t you just marry one and be done with it?