Instapundit quotes Charles Cooper quoting Rupert Murdoch.
“With newspapers cutting back and predictions of even worse times ahead, Rupert Murdoch said the profession may still have a bright future if it can shake free of reporters and editors who he said have forfeited the trust and loyalty of their readers.”
More Cooper quoting Murdoch (via memeorandum):
“Mr. Rather and his defenders are not alone,” he continued. “A recent American study reported that many editors and reporters simply do not trust their readers to make good decisions. Let’s be clear about what this means. This is a polite way of saying that these editors and reporters think their readers are too stupid to think for themselves.”
When you have that, bias becomes “perception of bias.”
Charles Johnson, rightly adds:
The media are still defensive about this incident. Not a single major news source has unequivocally admitted that those Rathergate documents were obvious, proven fakes; when they refer to the incident, it’s always phrased like this: “Right-wing bloggers alleged that the memos were forged,” or “Conservative pundits cast doubt on the authenticity of the documents.”
And as if to reinforce his point, here’s how the NYT portrays Rather’s lawsuit:
Rather’s Lawsuit Shows Role of G.O.P. in Inquiry
via memeorandum
Amen on the “complacency and condescension.” This is a familiar story to Media Blog readers. The first time I heard a newspaper colleague refer to non-journalists as “civilians,” it was obvious that something is wrong with the culture of the news media. And the more reporters and editors think of themselves as a specialized elite with access to esoteric knowledge, the worse the problem will get.
So it’s interesting that today the New York Times devotes some attention to Rupert Murdoch (via memeorandum)
All this from a charter member of what conservatives deride as the biased liberal media, right? Not quite. This take on Barack Obama comes from The New York Post, the feisty, generally conservative tabloid that is, like the Fox News Channel, part of Rupert Murdoch’s media empire, the News Corporation.
So has Mr. Murdoch gone soft on liberals — or perhaps just reacted pragmatically to Mr. Obama’s sizable victory? The answer, according to people who have watched him operate at close range, is that Mr. Murdoch is a less predictable, less doctrinaire character than his critics imagine.
“[L]ess doctrinaire,” there was a time when the New York Times might have deserved that description. Maybe instead of being rigidly liberal, the Times ought to be following stories and see where they lead instead of trying to shape the conclusions of its readership. Maybe instead of observing Murdoch with detachment the folks at the Times should be trying to learn from him.
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
