By Larry Elder
Thursday, May 30, 2013
CBS news anchor Scott Pelley offered an apology -- for
the wrong reason.
"Our house is on fire," said the CBS News
managing editor and evening anchor. Pelley, in a recent speech at Quinnipiac
University, said: "Today, right now, as we occupy this house (of American
journalism) that was built for us, our house is on fire. These have been a bad
few months for journalism. We're getting the big stories wrong, over and over
again."
Oh, please, pass the Kleenex.
You mean news outlets frequently get facts wrong when
competing to satisfy the public's desire for information?! When has that not
been the case? Remember when we were told that given the number of people
working at the World Trade Center on 9/11/01, we should expect 20,000 to 40,000
dead? During Hurricane Katrina, some news outlets described gun battles that
turned out to be nonexistent and offered up death totals that thankfully turned
out to be exaggerated.
Everybody can provide examples of wrongheaded reporting.
Given the rush to be first and the fight for ratings in an increasingly
atomized market, news sources can be expected to get things wrong. Usually, a
clarification follows -- with little consequence for having gotten it wrong.
Don't misunderstand. Now Pelley should apologize.
He should apologize for participating in the massive,
widespread liberal media bias that, according to a UCLA economist and political
scientist, gives Democrats an 8- to 10-point advantage in presidential
elections.
Consider the way major media have covered the IRS
scandal. A front-page headline in The New York Times captured the media's
general approach to the story: "IRS Focus on Conservatives Gives G.O.P. an
Issue to Seize On." Oh, we get what the Times wants to tell us. The meme
goes like this: At long last, after five years of digging dry holes, those
obstreperous Republicans have unearthed a scandal that threatens to derail
Obama's wonderful, progressive vision for America. When the dean of American
journalism, Bob Woodward, likened Benghazi to Watergate, pundits on MSNBC
pronounced the Pulitzer Prize winner senile.
Major media leave out one of the most important angles of
the IRS scandal. It is this. Why were so many conservative groups applying for
tax-exempt status to raise money for the 2008 and 2012 elections? Answer: For
the first time since the Watergate reforms, Obama refused matching federal
funds for the general election, because the funds come with a catch. The
candidate must agree to campaign finance limits. Obama figured, correctly it turns
out, that he could raise far more money without the matching funds and their
limitations.
Obama, in 2008 and again in 2012, raised more money than
any previous presidential candidate. He raised more money from Wall Street in
2008 than did John McCain. Democratic Hollywood mogul Jeff Katzenberg of
DreamWorks brought in more than $6.6 million for Obama in the two election
cycles.
Obama claims he accepts no money from "registered
lobbyists." But The New York Times reported a full year before Obama's
re-election: "At least 15 of Mr. Obama's 'bundlers' -- supporters who
contribute their own money to his campaign and solicit it from others -- are
involved in lobbying for Washington consulting shops or private companies. ...
They glide easily through the corridors of power in Washington, with a number
of them hosting Mr. Obama at fundraisers while also visiting the White House on
policy matters and official business."
Newsies like Pelley think of themselves as nonpartisan.
But where are the stories about how the growing size of government creates a
growing need to lobby? In 2000, many Democrats called the election
"stolen" because the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bush. To what
degree did IRS thuggery affect the election? How many conservatives decided
against actively participating in the election because they feared an IRS
audit?
The bigger the government, the more people will lobby to
influence the outcome. Lobbying is one of the freedoms recognized by the First
Amendment, the right of the people "to petition the government for a
redress of grievances." In addition to health care, Obama seeks to
increase the role of the federal government in education, transportation,
infrastructure, "climate change," nutrition and gun regulation, among
others.
In "Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media
Distort the News," ex-CBS newsman Bernard Goldberg describes a
conversation with the then-president of CBS News. "Look, Bernie,"
Andrew Heyward said, "of course there's a liberal bias in the news. All
the networks tilt left. ... If you repeat any of this, I'll deny it."
Pelley's "house" has been on fire for a long
time. He speaks only about getting things wrong with breaking stores. But media
bias is not late-breaking or fast-developing. It is a function of an
anti-business, pro-collectivism left-wing education. In 1980, a poll found that
40 percent of Columbia University journalism students believed in government
ownership of large corporations! Only a third believed the free enterprise
system was fair to workers!
It is this left-wing ideological pool from which major
news organizations hire their reporters. Apologize for that, Mr. Pelley.
No comments:
Post a Comment