Dan Rather Tells Jon Stewart Most Journalists Aren’t Liberal: ‘Hasn’t Been My Experience’ | NewsBusters.org

In the “You have to be kidding me” category —

Dan Rather Tells Jon Stewart Most Journalists Aren’t Liberal: ‘Hasn’t Been My Experience’ | NewsBusters.org.

JON STEWART, HOST: This idea of liberal bias and the idea, you know, in your experience, haven’t most journalists, haven’t their politics been somewhat more liberal?

DAN RATHER: No, it hasn’t been my experience.

STEWART: Oh, that hasn’t been your experience?

RATHER: It has not been my experience.Most journalists I grew up with, most journalists I’ve worked with and practiced with were trying to be honest brokers of information. Now, what sometimes got you a reputation you’re liberal, journalists generally form an apprenticeship covering the police beat at midnight, after midnight, it was Saturday night, the charity hospital. Journalists, the best of them, do see a Dickensian side of society that most people don’t see. So when they try to call attention to that, people who don’t like it say, “Oh, you’re liberal.” It has not been my experience.

I know that it’s widely believed that CBS, NBC, ABC chock full of liberals. Not true. What it’s chock full of is people who wanted to give honest news, straightforward news, and voted both ways in many elections. I’m not saying that nobody in the newsroom was liberal any more than I would say nobody was conservative. Frequently what happened people who were described as conservatives want to say, “I work at CBS News, and you know, almost everybody there was liberal.” What they really mean is not everybody there agreed with them all the time. This is a sham. It’s a camouflage for wanting…

STEWART: Do you think it’s been, it seems to have been very effective though, that working the refs. That’s what I would say. It’s really worked, and people are now very afraid to appear in any way as though they’re taking a position on anything.

RATHER: Well, that’s true. And that’s why I say that journalism, American journalism in some ways has lost its guts, or it needs a spine translate. I do not exempt myself in this criticism – made my mistakes along this line. But there is a price to pay, and I’m not excusing it, but what happens if you stand up and ask a really tough question now and challenge say a president or vice president, you know there’s going to be a price to be paid for that. And so often it is, “You know what? I’ll just get in the middle, move with the mass, I’ve got house payments and car [unintelligible].”

The bolding is mine, but can you believe that?  Let’s break it down —

Rather uses the terms “liberal” and “conservative” rather the party labels of “democrat” and “republican;” but let’s accept that liberal = democrat and conservative = republican.  Ready?

Here’s a study covering decades about the voting habits of journalists.  Isn’t it funny how the journalists vote for democrats, sometimes as much as 90% of the time.  At best, it appears journalists vote for republicans 20% of the time.

Yet Rather claims that it’s about even in the newsroom, between conservatives and liberals.  Huh.  Isn’t that odd?  Does 80% to 20% seem like an even split to you?  I’m no mathematician (maybe), but I’m pretty sure they aren’t even close.  Yet Rather would have us believe that it’s really a pretty even split and anyone who says otherwise is just some kind of malcontent.

He goes on to say that conservatives whining about being outnumbered is really just being mad that people don’t agree with them.  Um.  Doesn’t that make the point that maybe conservatives are outnumbered by liberals in the newsroom?

He wants to make out that journalists are honest brokers of the truth, yet he peddles this piffle?  What about their honest coverage of Solyndra?  Fast and Furious?

Honestly, this guy is either disingenuous or he’s senile.  Possibly both, since the two things aren’t mutually exclusive.  But he’s certainly not speaking the truth.

Forged documents.  Wasn’t there a story about some journalist presenting forged documents as proof against a sitting politican running for re-election?  I wonder if there was some political agenda being advanced by that journalist?

So, yes, Mr. Rather.  A more credible source to answer the question of media bias could certainly not exist.

Oh wait!  That was sarcasm, wasn’t it?

Previous Post
Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: