Psychophants

"In a way Obama is standing above the country, above the world. He's sort of God. He's going to bring all different sides together."

Maybe a joke? Maybe a gush from a star-struck fan? Maybe the mindless rambling of a psycho? You be the judge, but this is a direct quote from Evan Thomas, an editor at Newsweek, on Chris Mathews' MSNBC Hardball on Friday June 5th. Thomas made the statement with a straight face. He was quite serious. Mathews only response was an affirming "yeah." The intense media focus resulting from the comment was conspicuous only in its lacking.

Claims of a leftward tilt in the mainstream media are nothing new. There was a time, not very long ago, that I believed that the bias in the mainstream News outlets in the United states was environmental. When everybody that you spend time with shares a particular bias, that bias is going to naturally, though unintentionally, come out. It is no secret that news rooms are dominated by folks that share a liberal world view. The members of the press share a voting preference for democrat candidates, their industry is centralized in areas dominated by liberal demographics, the celebrities they hang out with promote liberal causes. It seems very plausible that they might unintentionally project the values of their "normal" world into their reporting. In light of all of this, how could they be expected to see their bias slipping through? The answer: As easily as Chris Mathews knows beyond a doubt that Barack Obama is really not "sort of God" ( the "thrill going up [his] leg" not withstanding). At some point the preponderance of evidence just makes the verdict undeniably obvious.

It does not bother me that the press is critical of conservatives and Republicans. It is the obligation of the press to be critical of elected officials. The fact is that the "fourth estate" is quite able to scrutinize certain people and to perform credible feats of investigative journalism in areas that interest them. The problem is that they just aren't interested in being critical in some areas; areas of vital interest to the American people.

A free and unbeholden press is one of the most crucial protections of our fundamental freedoms, but a monolithic press in league with the government they are ordained to view suspiciously and hold accountable is a very real threat to liberty. There is a scenario that we have seen played out repeatedly in recent history; a scenario where a government seizes control of the press and media outlets to strengthen its hold on power and quiet the voices of opposition. We are witnessing a new variation on this theme in America today; a press that willingly, even eagerly, surrenders its role as a free press to become the mouthpiece of government. The freedom of speech guaranteed to all Americans in the 1st amendment is greatly curtailed when the press becomes a symbiotic member of a government-media complex. What is the value of our freedom to speak when we are denied access to the pulpit? The freedom to whisper to each other in our enclaves is no freedom at all.

Here are a few recent examples of media in the service of the government of the United States:

"A recent CBS News poll shows that 53 percent of the American people fully backs the stimulus package, 63 percent of people we polled thought the Republican opposition to the stimulus package was for political reasons. So, are you out of touch with the American people? Do you think the Republicans are digging themselves in a hole by not being more supportive of the President’s proposals?"— CBS’s Katie Couric interviewing Republican House Leader John Boehner on the February 24 Evening News (i.e. supportive like the press?).

"[Jindal] is running for the outside rail of the Republican Party, the right-wing rail. That’s all the room that’s left on that side because Barack has grabbed the center with the charm he showed tonight in his excellent rhetoric."— Chris Matthews during MSNBC’s live coverage of Obama’s speech to Congress, February 24 (only Matthews could make the claim that anything about Obama is 'center').

"It made me feel pretty good. I thought it was a great speech. You know, a friend of mine said, ‘Oh my God, we have a President again!’ Now, in some ways, that’s not fair to Bush, but that’s the way you felt. You felt this was a guy who was totally in charge."— NPR’s Nina Totenberg on Obama’s address to Congress, February 27 Inside Washington (is that the National part or the Public part Nina?).

"I like to say that, in some ways, Barack Obama is the first President since George Washington to be taking a step down into the Oval Office. I mean, from visionary leader of a giant movement, now he’s got an executive position that he has to perform in, in a way."— ABC Nightline co-anchor Terry Moran to Media Bistro’s Steve Krakauer in a February 20 "Morning Media Menu" podcast (he came down to earth just for us...).

“Anderson, there was no way he could quite reach the summit with this speech. He couldn't please everyone. But, overall, it was the most powerful and the most persuasive speech any American President has ever made to the Muslim populations around the world.” - CNN political analyst David Gergen on Anderson Cooper 360, June 4th (It may be hard to imagine Anderson Cooper as the straight man for David Gergen, but there you go. Objectivity at its finest).

It is truly stunning how many examples of this type of coverage are revealed by a short web search. The Obama administration has deputy press secretaries planted at news anchor desks throughout the country. This is the environment in which we find a headline today on the Drudge Report about ABC's plans to air a special edition of World News from the Blue Room of the White House. Charlie Gibson will anchor the prime time special entitled 'Prescription for America' to cover Obama's government health care plan. Experts presenting opposition view points are not expected to be included.

Typically the revolutionary comes to power and then seizes control of the press. In America the activist press was on the ground, in place, eagerly awaiting the leader for whom they were paving the way. The most vital role of a free press is to serve as a watchdog on government in the interest of the people. The mainstream media in America has abdicated their responsibility and betrayed our trust. There should be no doubt that they are aware of what they are doing and that it is intentional.