The Tennessean has provided great coverage of each of the candidates for governor.

The Tennessean has a liberal editorial policy and sometimes conservatives disparage the newspaper as biased. I criticize the paper for what they don't report, but I think that may be a function of being understaffed rather than bias. I often think their news coverage is shallow and weak but occasionally they cover an issue in depth and do a good job. 

I am often surprised at the number of otherwise informed people who seem to care about local government and their community but who do not subscribe to The Tennessean. I know sometimes it seems like there is not much news in newspapers and they may not be worth reading but I think that may be more reflective of readers who do not care much for real news, rather than newspapers that do not want to report the news.  Unfortunately, as readership of  newspapers fall, newspapers have smaller staffs and can report less news. I honestly think Americans have shorter attention spans than in the past and they want large pictures and lots of graphics rather than in depth news coverage.

Despite the availability of lots of sources for news, I think we may be less informed, especially about local issues, than ever before. When I served in the Council in the decade of the 80's we had two vibrant newspapers competing for the story as well as the three local TV stations and WSM and WLAC radio with actual reporters digging for news. Now it seems the radio and TV news contains less real news. If you take away the sports, car wrecks, shootings and weather there is not a lot left.

With social media and bloggers you may get lots of opinions but not much news.  Facebook is no substitute for a daily newspaper. To have the dirt and corruption exposed and complex issues explained you need paid reporters whose job it is to report the news. I think the disappearance of newspapers and declining readership does not bode well for our democracy.

The Tennessean has provided great coverage on the race for governor. If you want to know the position of each of the candidates on medicaid expansion, or immigration or transportation policy or any number of other issues or you want to fact-check an attack ad, the Tennessean has provided good coverage.

I could not be more pleased with the Tennessean than I am with the profiles the paper has written on each of the major Republican candidates for governor. The profiles tell the life story of each of the candidates and something of their position on the issues.  They do not demean or mock or make snide remarks about any of them. They do address the negatives of each candidate but I think the reporting of each in these profiles has been insightful, balanced and fair. In fact, in each case it almost seems like the reporter actually likes the person they are covering.  If you want to know more about the candidates than just the info you get in a 30 second commercial, read these:

 Randy Boyd, a former economic development chief, hopes to 'come back and finish the job' as governor, by Tyler Whetstone.
 Diane Black says her aim is to 'protect our Tennessee values,' by Joel Ebert.

Bill Lee hopes personal transformation, business background set him apart, by Jordan Buie. 

Beth Harwell says she is best positioned to 'hit the ground running' as next governor, by Joel Ebert.

Top Stories

Journalists Surveyed: Democrats Outnumber Republicans

by John Sexton - A survey by the Indiana University School of Journalism found that self-described Democrats outnumber Republicans by a ratio of four to one, 28 percent to 7 percent.

The survey (pdf), which has been conducted every 10-11 years since 1971, found that journalists have abandoned both parties. Compared to 2002, the last time it was taken, the percentage of Democrats dropped from 35 to 28. The percentage of Republicans dropped even more sharply over the same time period from 18 down to just seven percent today. (read more)

My Comment: I bet if you could determine how the 50% who are "independents" voted, I would be willing to bet that they overwhelming vote Democrat.  I suspect that knowing the mainstream print media has a reputation for being biased in favor of a liberal point of view, many journalist claim to be independent to lessen that perception of bias.  And, they may really consider themselves independent but still overwhelmingly vote Democrat.

I read the mainstream press but have almost no confidence in what I read. I read hoping some liberal journalist are able to occasionally be objective and let some unfiltered facts find there way into their reporting, but I doubt it. The way the press has show unwavering loyalty to President Obama has made me have less confidence in the mainstream press than at any point in my life. The way they have covered Obamacare, Benghazi, Fast and Furious, the IRS scandal, debt and budget issues and any number of things would almost make me think they get their daily marching orders from the White House. I know that is not the case, they simply share a world view and a political philosophy with those they cover. They are such true believers in the values of inclusiveness, non-judgmentalism, liberalism, and everything politically correct that they cannot see but one side of a story. They don't want to discover facts that would shine a bad light on America's first Black president. I also suspect that they are ignorant of economics, for the most part, and do not see a danger in massive deficits and their concept of social justice is such that they think there is nothing the nation cannot afford in pursuit of social justice. I don't really think there is a conspiracy to distort the news, it is just that the press is ruled by a heard mentality and almost all share the same point of view.

While talk radio is opinion and not news reporting and a lot of blogs are commentary on others reporting and not much original investigative reporting, at lease these sources bring some balance. Thank God for Fox news, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Times, and few other papers, and those handful of blogs that do reporting.

I have thought the demise of the role of print journalism has been something to be regretted. One does not have an informed electorate when people get their news from the Colbert Report, John Stewart, and Saturday Night Life or their peers. For that matter, neither do you have an informed electorate if you get your news from Rush Limbaugh. To have a strong democracy you need informed voters and to have informed voters someone needs to do the in depth reporting of hard news and expose corruption and scandals and educate voters. On the other hand, I have such mistrust of the mainstream press that maybe the demise of the press is not such a bad thing. Maybe the "mainstream" press will become to be viewed as the minority politically correct press and other and better sources of news will emerge to fill the void. I hope that is what happens.

Top Stories

Editorial Boards Weigh in on Democrats’ Decision to Break the President’s “C-SPAN Pledge”

by Kevin Boland on January 6th, 2010

Reports that President Obama and Democratic Congressional leaders have cut a deal to skip a formal Conference on their health care legislation - a flat violation of the President’s promise that such negations would be broadcast on C-SPAN for the American people to see - has provoked outrage across America.

Today, editorial boards from coast to coast weighed in, and - to say the least - they disagree with Speaker Pelosi’s assertion that “There has never been a more open process.”

A roundup of newspaper editorials from this morning’s papers follows:

Boston Herald: “Let Public in the Room”

"This administration - and Democratic leaders - talk a good game about transparency in government. Now they have an opportunity to practice it. If they’re going to throw the legislative rulebook out the window, at the very least they could give congressional Republicans a chance to watch the process on TV."


Investor’s Business Daily: “Let the Sun Shine”

"House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, has called the Democrats’ plan to bypass a conference committee a “shady backroom deal.” An overstatement? Hardly. One House Democratic aide told a blogger that “this process cuts out the Republicans.” The Democrats fear that if they follow the traditional route, the GOP could use the Senate filibuster rule to shut down the process of organizing the committee.

"Bypassing a conference committee also cuts out a public that will suffer losses from whatever monstrosity is produced by the cover of darkness. Americans stand to lose their power of choice over health care decisions and be stripped of a significant portion of their earnings to pay for a plan most don’t want. They deserve to see in an open forum what is being done to them. Instead, they’re likely to get whatever the Democrats want to force on them."


New York Daily News: “Ready for Prime Time”

"Candidate Barack Obama made a straightforward health care reform promise on the campaign trail in 2008: ‘We’ll have the negotiations televised on C-SPAN, so the people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents and who is making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies.’ At the time, he hit all the right notes. Populism. Transparency. Good government. But today, President Obama is not quite with the program."


Las Vegas Review-Journal: “Broken Promise”

"What Americans don’t know — and what they won’t get to see — is how far Sen. Reid and Rep. Pelosi will go to get what they want. Taxpaying voters will be cut off from the decisive debate on a monstrous increase in consumer costs and federal authority. Can senators and representatives defend the economically impossible concepts they embrace — more health care, lower costs — in spontaneous, free-flowing discussions? Or will they simply push forward a slip of paper with the dollar amount needed to secure their support, as Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., already has?"


New York Post: “Dems Against Democracy”

"As DC Democrats slink behind closed doors to craft a final health-care bill — thousands of pages long and sure to sap the nation’s economic future — Americans need to ask: Just what are Dems so ashamed of? ‘We will do what is necessary to pass the bill,’ House Speaker Nancy Pelosi insisted, as she and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid moved to forgo a panel to finalize legislation. Instead, they’ll build their Frankenstein’s monster of a bill in secret, mocking democratic principles all the way."


The Wall Street Journal: “The Tom DeLay Democrats”

"Evading conference has become standard operating procedure in this Congress, though you might think they’d allow for the more open and thoughtful process on what Mr. Obama has called ‘the most important piece of social legislation since the Social Security Act passed in the 1930s and the most important reform of our health-care system since Medicare passed in the 1960s’…Apparently this Congress knows no shame."

Comment
In my last post I said an intemperate thing when I condemned the "sanctimonious main stream press" for their failure to condemn the disgraceful backroom deal making and lack of transparency in the health care refrom legislation negotiations. I should not paint all of the press with the same brush. They are not "phonies, one and all." There are still some elements of the press that have integrity and believe in good government and democracy.

Top Stories

Helen Thomas Challenge Gibbs On "Controlled" Town Hall Meeting

Even the main-stream, Obama-adoring, liberal press looks like they are beginning to get tired of being nothing but props for the President. No one likes being taken for granted and I guess even prostitutes liked to be kissed every once in a while.

Obama's town hall meetings are scripted shams. The "press conferences" are not press conferences at all. Reporters are told in advance who will be called upon to ask a question and the President is told what questions will be asked.

It looks like Helen Thomas has got balls than anyone in the room. Chip Reid of CBS was outspoken about the Obama control of the press also and is to be commended. Following the testy exchange above, Thomas said that not even Richard Nixon tried to control the press the way Obama is trying to do so. “Nixon didn’t try to do that,” Thomas said. “They couldn’t control (the media). They didn’t try. “What the hell do they think we are, puppets?” (link)

Most members of the mainstream press have gladly carried water for the President and allowed themselves to be nothing more that props. The mainstream press has allowed itself to become the Obama Government's Department of Propaganda. They love him and will, for the most part, keep on prostituting themselves for the anointed one. I guess ideology trumps journalistic integrity most of the time. Helen Thomas is one tough old buzzard and it looks like she is tired of being used as a prop. Will the President continue to control the press are will other members get tired of the charade and get tired of being used and controlled? Will they continue to be cheerleaders or will they demand respect and stand up for freedom of the press.

Top Stories

The White House Press Corp (aka Department of Propaganda) Cartoons

Top Stories

Media Kowtows to Supreme Leader

Top Stories

ABC Self-Nationalizes For Obama

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted Friday, June 19, 2009 4:20 PM PT

Media Bias: As much of the U.S. private sector, including health care providers, resists government takeovers, what a sorry sight to see ABC News leap forward to make itself a propaganda arm of the government.

But that's the story as ABC crosses the line from journalism to advocacy in turning its coverage of health care over to the White House. (link)

Top Stories