Trump in It to Win It His Own Way
Don't Let America's Biggest Money Managers Play Politics with Your Pension
As Election Approaches, Policy and Party as Important as Personalities
There Is No 'International Law'
Stop the Migrant Invasion
Injustice for All: The Reliance on Cohen’s Testimony Reveals a Desperate Prosecution
Biden Decries a 'Failed Approach to Marijuana' but Sticks With It
Why Is the White House Hiding the Nationalities of Terror Suspects at the...
House Republicans Build Momentum for Election Integrity
The Left Won't Know What Hit Them
Biden Fails to Fire FDIC Chairman for Ten Year History of Overseeing Abuse
More Immigration, More Inflation, More Bankruptcies
Here's When Merrick Garland Will Testify Before the House Judiciary Committee
'Race Is Still Open,' Top Pollster Says

Crossing the "Cultural Line"

Howard Kurtz's column is a figurative effort to throw a glass of cold water on the press and cuff it across its collective face.  As he notes in today's column, journalists
"seem to have crossed a cultural line into mythmaking" when it comes to the lovestruck purple prose that passes for "coverage" of the new president.

Kurtz's admission that something is seriously amiss here is welcome -- and might have been even more timely before the election.  Interestingly, Kurtz shares the same confidence of his colleagues (as I noted here yesterday) "Obama's days of walking on water won't last indefinitely."
And again, I'm not so sure.  The press has a lot invested in Barack Obama -- including its own credibility.  No doubt part of the rationale for cheering him on to victory was their own sense that it would be "good" for the country to have him win.  And once journalists are willing to go there, then it's a pretty short step to concluding that, likewise, it's "good" for the country that he succeed, or "bad" if he fails -- and then adjusting their coverage accordingly.

Such determinations, of course, shouldn't be the press' domain.  But it's far from clear that the press realizes that.  Yesterday, WaPo ombudsman Deborah Howell rationalized liberal press bias with the explanation that "Journalism naturally draws liberals; we like to change the world. " 

Strange.  I didn't think reporters were supposed to be "changing the world" (isn't that what politicians and "community organizers" do?).  I thought journalists were simply supposed to be reporting the news -- so that the citizens of this democratic republic could be deciding for themselves how best they can be governed.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Videos