The media aren’t liberal. They’re just idiots.

And they’re not doing their job. They’re behaving as if giving equal time to both sides of an issue — say, the Swiftie thing — is being “objective,” when in reality we have actual facts on one side and an enormous pile of lies on the other. Any real journalist — are there any on TV anymore? — would actually examine what’s being said, and try to separate the wheat from the rhetorical chaff (read: bullshit).

At least SOME people are noticing this. From the Times’ Alessandra Stanley, quoted at TPM; she referrs to the softball treatment Wolf Blitzer gave Bob “Hatchetman” Dole, who said demonstrably untrue things about Kerry’s war record on his show:

That kind of air-kiss coverage is typical of cable news, where the premium is on speed and spirited banter rather than painstaking accuracy. But it has grown into a lazy habit: anchors do not referee – they act as if their reportage is fair and accurate as long as they have two opposing spokesmen on any issue.

More satirically, The Daily Show made the same point Monday night:

STEWART: Here’s what puzzles me most, Rob. John Kerry’s record in Vietnam is pretty much right there in the official records of the US military, and haven’t been disputed for 35 years? CORDDRY: That’s right, Jon, and that’s certainly the spin you’ll be hearing coming from the Kerry campaign over the next few days. STEWART: Th-that’s not a spin thing, that’s a fact. That’s established. CORDDRY: Exactly, Jon, and that established, incontravertible fact is one side of the story. STEWART: But that should be — isn’t that the end of the story? I mean, you’ve seen the records, haven’t you? What’s your opinion? CORDDRY: I’m sorry, my *opinion*? No, I don’t have ‘o-pin-i-ons’. I’m a reporter, Jon, and my job is to spend half the time repeating what one side says, and half the time repeating the other. Little thing called ‘objectivity’ — might wanna look it up some day. STEWART: Doesn’t objectivity mean objectively weighing the evidence, and calling out what’s credible and what isn’t? CORDDRY: Whoa-ho! Well, well, well — sounds like someone wants the media to act as a filter! [high-pitched, effeminate] ‘Ooh, this allegation is spurious! Upon investigation this claim lacks any basis in reality! Mmm, mmm, mmm.’ Listen buddy: not my job to stand between the people talking to me and the people listening to me. STEWART: So, basically, you’re saying that this back-and-forth is never going to end. CORDDRY: No, Jon — in fact a new group has emerged, this one composed of former Bush colleages, challenging the president’s activities during the Vietnam era. That group: Drunken Stateside Sons of Privilege for Plausible Deniability. They’ve apparently got some things to say about a certain Halloween party in ’71 that involved trashcan punch and a sodomized pi–ata. Jon — they just want to set the record straight. That’s all they’re out for. STEWART: Well, thank you Rob, good luck out there. We’ll be right back. Via Atrios

No wonder mainstream media hates these guys. They’re the only ones still doing any sort of real commentary.

Comments are closed.