I am a news junkie. I admit it. I’m hooked.
But very little that I read in the news surprises me. Most of what I read, much of it falling in the category of bad news, is actually rather predictable. Indoctrinating children about Trans madness? Typical. Mass shootings? No surprise there. Climate change hysteria? Duh! Media bias? What else is new?
Well, there is something new I learned recently about media bias, particularly newspaper bias. And what I learned really opened my eyes, something I am about to do for you with this article.
Most newspapers are Left-of-Center in their outlook, meaning, the people who write and edit the stories are almost always on the Left with few exceptions. There is nothing innately wrong with this (apart from the fact that I insist Leftism, as a general rule, is both corrupt and poisonous) as people are free to believe what they want to believe, including Leftists. The problem is when journalists allow their Leftist world view to churn out news stories in a way that is not only not fair and balanced, but blatantly dishonest and unquestionably skewed in one direction, leaving out key information that doesn’t help the Leftist cause, and over-accentuating a narrative they wish to foist on the public, giving them a warped view of reality.
I have always wondered why newspapers such as the Washington Post, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, USA Today, the Chicago Tribune, the Miami Herald, the Boston Globe, and other such newspapers wrote in such a biased manner, apart from the fact that the writers and editors live in a Left-Wing Echo Chamber. I thought there must be more to it than that because the writers and editors have to know that they are not operating with any journalistic integrity. So why the consistent bias against America, against Trump, against Conservatism in general, against religion in general and Christianity in particular, against the traditional American family, against goodness, etc.?
And now I have what may well be the answer.
And I have CT, to thank. (I’ll reveal his actual name later). CT is an even bigger news junkie than I am – by far! The man used to read four specific newspapers – cover to cover – every day (The Washington Post, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and USA Today) all while he was in college! And to this day he is still a fanatically committed reader of newspapers.
CT articulated a profound question in a recent opinion piece: How is it possible that the Washington Post, which has always been center-left, pulled out all the stops and used everything they had in their journalistic arsenal, to take down Bill Clinton, a Democratic president, in 1998 over a matter involving sex with an intern (and lying about it) and yet go completely dark on Joe Biden 25 years later, a president who has far, far graver accusations against him?
For those of you who wonder what I have in mind with respect to Joe Biden, allow me to enumerate a few items:
Now, which do you think, honestly, is more consequential: a President having a sexual dalliance in the Oval Office and lying about it, or the three items I mention above?
Please do not presume that I downplay sexual immorality; I do not. I come from a faith community that, in the eyes of the Almighty, places extra-marital sex near the top of the “Sin Totem Pole.” But those sins are of a personal nature, involving, in this case, Bill Clinton, his wife, and his intern – and God, of course. But the accusations I have described above concerning Joe Biden are, if true, astonishing in their level of corruption on a geo-political scale – the level of deceit would be mind-boggling.
So with all of that in mind, CT wonders how it is possible that the Washington Post, 25 years ago, did not hesitate to go after one of their own (i.e., a Democrat) and today, they are for all intents and purposes, silent. In other words, if a given subscriber to their newspaper gets his news only from the Washington Post, which is certainly the case for many of their subscribers, those very subscribers may not have the slightest inkling of the mounting legal troubles that are closing in on the President of the United States.
How is that possible?
Here is CT’s theory, which I find very compelling.
CT believes the rise of the internet has a lot to do with it.
25 years ago, during the Clinton presidency, the internet was just barely getting going. It was new. And it wasn’t widely embraced just yet. At that time, newspapers employed a business model that was primarily fueled by advertisers. 25 years later, here we are in 2023, and now, because of the internet (and online news), newspapers employ a different business model, one that is primarily fueled by subscribers.
We will unpack this in much greater detail in the next issue of Uncommon Sense. Yes, you will have to wait for Part 2 which will come out in August, with issue #289. In the meantime, let this information percolate in your mind a bit, and see if you can come up with some plausible theories on how the widespread use of the internet, and the move from an advertising-based model to a subscription-based model, may have made the Left-wing press even more Left-wing.
Get cutting-edge tips, resources, and perspectives: