Washington Typists

One of the criticisms of the Mainstream Media (MSM) is that too often it eagerly serves as a foil for conservatives, pretending to debate their talking points but instead ending up in a role similar to that of the Washington Generals vs the Harlem Globetrotters.

In their role, members of the MSM (or perhaps the Washington Typists) discuss or disseminate talking points developed by conservatives, bringing them onto the national stage and giving them legitimacy, but never challenging them enough to show their fallacies.

A potential new member of the Typists may be Deborah Howell, the new ombudsman of the Washington Post, who on Sunday attempted to show Post is fair because both conservatives and liberals have problems with the Post, saying conservatives forget the Post was tough on Clinton and The liberals seem to expect The Post to be the house organ of Moveon.org.

(Note to Howell, no, conservatives have not forgot the Post's questionable coverage of Clinton, they just expect the media NOT to investigate Bush with the same gusto they went after Clinton.)

The problem with Howell's cheap shot about Moveon.org is that it is merely a repetition of a conservative talking point that liberals want a third party, such as Moveon.org to direct the news decisions of the media.

No, what liberals want is for the media to do their jobs. Liberals want media coverage to be accurate and complete but get upset when it is incomplete, inaccurate or pointedly conservative. Conservatives, on the other hand, EXPECT media coverage to support conservative views and are upset when it does not. If you have any doubt of this, consider the supposed media of choice for conservatives (FOX News) and liberals (NPR) and which is more accurate.

And while Ms. Howell thought she was disparaging liberals, the sad thing is that Moveon.org is now working to help the media with a campaign to reverse the Tribune Company's staff cuts at some of their papers (i.e. help keep more journalist reporting).

A few members of the media do go against the grain and outline problems liberals have identified, such as John Harris of the Washington Post saying in 2001 that Bush was getting break from the media, to Mark Halperin of ABC News in 2004 and Ken Silverstein of the Los Angeles Times saying the media attempts of an artificial balance of coverage of the two parties was poor reporting because balance isn't always fair.

So while the appointed media protectors may question the motives of liberals regarding the type of journalism they would like to see, what the protectors don't understand is that while they are ridiculing liberals about their views of the media, their own coworkers are providing ammunition to refute their arguments. So while the Howell's of the world are calling us crazy, their co-workers are saying 'maybe so but that doesn't mean they are wrong."