news fanatics

For a long time, I’ve been meaning to vent some frustration about bias in the media, but it seems like such a tired, old horse to beat that I frankly don’t want to bore my beloved readers with it. Honestly, I find liberal media bias so transparently obvious that to write about it would be an unnecessary and long-winded essay that would be altogether trite. Fortunately, however, better writers than I have tackled this subject. Taking another link from Soundfury (might as well if it’s good, right?), I point you too Orson Scott Card’s guest column over at OpinionJournal.

Card says there’s a bias to be found at Fox News, and I would completely agree. However, Card defends this bias:

When a nation is at war–which on 9/11 we finally realized that we are–we don’t want to hear the news from neutral parties. We want the news to be accurate, yes–and Fox has had its share of painfully accurate scoops that nobody wanted to hear, but which we needed to know. But when a negative story comes out, we want the people telling us the news to say it with regret. And when America wins, we want our news media to tell us with excitement and happiness.

In other words, we want to hear the truth from a friend.

He concludes:

What makes the liberal bias in the mainstream media so pernicious is that they deny that they’re biased and insist that their twisted version of events is “reality,” and anyone who disagrees with them is either mentally or morally suspect. In other words, they’re fanatics. And, like all good fanatics, they’re utterly convinced that they’re in sole possession of virtue and truth.

I’m not sure I would so harshly characterize the mainstream media (though I have met individual liberals who deserve the harshness), but I think Card hits the nail on the head: the real problem with bias in the mainstream media is that it is an unconfessed bias. That is what really bothers me. After all, avoiding all bias is nearly impossible, but to try to ignore it or deny it is irresponsible and arrogant.

A personal note: Orson Scott Card is one of my favorite science-fiction writers. He wrote one of the few books I’ve read twice: Ender’s Game

9 thoughts on “news fanatics

  1. Just thought i’d chime in about Ender’s Game, holy moly is it a fine book. I’m going through the entire series right now.

  2. Bob, there are so very many good books to read. Do you really have time to read a book twice? There are some exceptions to this, but I’d say they are very rare.

    Soini, I’d like to know what you think about the other two books. I’ve heard one sucks and one is pretty good.

  3. Funny thing about the Fox News average staff person is that, in all likelihood, they are less politically oriented than your average mainstream media newsroom, just going by surveys. (Is Geraldo Rivera really that conservative?) But it’s only conspicuous with Fox News because they aren’t all left of center. Objectivity is the emperor, and he is wearing no clothes.

  4. Do you truly have a handle on what you have read when you only read it once? Or, in your rush to read as many books as you can, do the books from a year or two ago fade from your mind and become as if you had never read them because you refuse to read them more than just once? As well, how does one know that the next book that one reads will be as good as the book one has just read? And who says one has to read cover to cover each time? I’ve probably read most of my P.G. Wodehouse books through at least 4 or 5 times each, but only once or twice cover to cover. The rest accumulate from my taking a few minutes now and again to dip into them and sample passages. To re-read sections I enjoyed and to refresh my remembrances of my initial enjoyment.

    And if I could only pick a couple books to read more than once, there’s no way “Ender’s Game” would make the cut. 😕

  5. Ender’s Game is an awesome book! If you dis it, then you’re a dweeb!

    It’s not as if I have a thing against reading books twice. It’s just I’d rather use my reading time to read something different and new.

  6. Are you aware that George Soros’ organization is fighting Fox News. When one of the world’s richest men, and most notable hedge fund manager is fighting your organiziation, it might be an indicator that you’re doing something wrong.

  7. :err: Fox News isn’t my organization. And even rich men have their own idealogies that go beyond whether an organization is “doing something wrong.” He’s got his own idealogies he’s advancing. I’m not sure how Soros’ skills with making money gives him any type of special knowledge of how to run a news organization. Besides, if you want to bust out rich dudes for support, I’d just point to Murdoch who is not only fabulously rich, he’s actually in the news industry, which makes him much more qualified to determine whether a news network is on the right track or not. Fox News is obviously doing something right since they’re crushing the competition. is going after Fox News’ “fair and balanced” slogan. Obviously to left-wingers it’s not going to seem to be either of those, but to sue over that is like suing a burger joint for claiming it has the “best burger in the country.”

    Frankly, I rarely watch Fox News. If I do watch cable news, that is what I watch, but it’s a rare occasion. Also, I can’t get to while on campus because our network is glitched or something. Besides, they did a redesign of the site, which sucks. Considering these things, I think I might delink it anyway . . .

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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