The Key Points from Rathergate

Well, tonight is Dan's last night... an end to a ra^ther biased (ahem) career. Ra^thergate was merely the final exclamation point on his career of journalism on behalf of the liberal worldview, as Brent Bozell's Media Research Center has demonstrated so well on their website here, here, here, and here.

But what do we really know about this episode? What has Ra^thergate really taught us? Here are the key points that I learned:

1. the Mainstream Media (MSM) often times treats "partisan political operatives" of the left as unimpeachable and objective sources.
2. When presented wi^th information from the Left, the MSM will perform a cursory review and corroboration (or none at all).
3. When caught and exposed, the MSM will attack its critics as "partisan political operatives." (perhaps a bit of projection here?)
4. After stonewalling, the MSM will launch an investigation that will not answer the tough questions, will not address the key issue at hand, and will not correctly assign responsibility. Once completed, the MSM will consider this the end of the discussion.

In the end, the only way that the MSM can regain their credibility and increase their trustwor^thiness above that of used-car salesmen salespersons is for them to admit their slant of the news (based on the editors running the organization), or to at least state that their previous claims of objectivity are incorrect and each story is reported wi^th some degree of bias in it. Admit that they try their best to remove bias, but they're all human and are unable to remove it entirely. If there's a consistent bias in their coverage (from story to story and reporter/editor to reporter/editor), they should state so openly.

I won't hold my brea^th...

Courage indeed, Dan... puhleasse...




Your Co-Conspirator,
ARC: St Wendeler