From the files of the Media Research Center – www.mediaresearch.org.

“On Tuesday night (September 20, 2005), without identifying the Union of Concerned Scientists as a far-left group, CBS's Bill Whitaker relayed how a spokesman for the group charged that damage to Louisiana's barrier islands is being "made worse...by global warming, as ice caps melt and oceans rise."

Robert Bazell on Wednesday's NBC Nightly News acknowledged, "...scientists say that one season, even like this one, cannot indicate anything about climate change." Yet he went on to showcase a fear mongering sound bite from a Stanford scientist: "At the moment, we've only warmed up one [degree]. What happens when we warm up three or five, which is projected in the next several decades to the end of the century?"

Bazell ominously concluded: "Warming that many experts say results partly from humans releasing greenhouse gases possibly creating even more violent storms in the future.”

In order to understand this paragraph from the Media Research Center’s analysis of this CBS and NBC reports, one must ask and answer certain questions. These questions never occur to news reporters or their producers or their network executives. That is the flaw of the profession and one that will sink these left wing journalists––eventually.  

More importantly, these questions must occur to the viewing public if they are to be well informed. Furthermore, they must occur if we are to identify the wayward journalists and insist that they tell us the news in a fair and balanced manner. 

But first… 

The Questions:  Why did CBS reporter Bill Whitaker fail to correctly identify the Union of Concerned Scientists as a far–left group? Why did he select only this group to feature as the major spokes group of this story? Why didn’t Whitaker quote those who disagree with the UCS group, i.e., the other side of the story? Why did NBC News’ Robert Bazell feature the ‘fear–mongering’ sound bite in his news the story? And why was Bazell allowed to editorialize as part of his news report? Aren’t editorials separate from news reports?

The Answers:  If CBS and NBC were actually to ask and answer these questions they would be forced to admit their bias. They would be forced to admit that it is bad journalism to refrain from identifying the group as left wing. It is a basic principle of journalism to identify a group’s entire position. Not to do so would be wrong. Next they would be forced to admit that there is another side of the story. NBC would be forced to admit that they had allowed the blatantly biased editorializing by newsman Bazell. And, they would have to acknowledge that there are many scientists and meteorologists who disagree with the UCS group.

This chain of logic (basic Socratic thinking) would tie them in knots. These newsmen and their producers can not allow themselves to ask and answer these questions. If they did, their motives and their agenda would be exposed. And they would be forced––by logical reasoning––to admit that this report is an example of their bias.

When news reporters tell us that they are not biased (as per Dan Rather) be sure to ask yourself if they are being honest.

The specific news segments are a blatant example of unfair and unbalanced reporting––an example of the elitist media’s brain washing machine––totally consistent with their left wing ideological agenda. At its roots, that ideology is both anti-American and anti-capitalist.

And these two issues represent the crisis at the heart of the news media.

The Machinations of the Brain Washing Machine

Skewing news reports to fit a left wing agenda has become ‘normal’ in the elitist media––as well as in the universities and their journals; in TV shows, films, popular music, books and magazines.

Explains James Piereson of The Weekly Standard in a recent article on the “Left University.” His analysis, in general, cites the same issues that apply to the left media.

“The left university, according to its self-understanding, is devoted to the exposure of the oppression of the various groups that have been the West's victims--women, blacks, Hispanics, gays, and others that have been officially designated as oppressed groups--and to those groups' representation. This is the so-called "diversity" ideology to which every academic dean, provost, and president must pledge obedience and devotion.”

“The university, moreover, has formed an informal political alliance with the other liberal and left-wing institutions in our society: Hollywood, public sector labor unions, large charitable foundations, the news media, and, of course, the Democratic Party. All are driven by the same doctrine of diversity. These institutions have provided political protection and encouragement for the academy as it has moved steadily leftward.”

Most reporters do not comprehend why they are criticized for this agenda. They do not believe it to be an inappropriate agenda. They see themselves as crusaders for the good and the moral. By reporting from this agenda, they are skewing the news and avoiding facts which might contradict their views.

They are unwilling to think outside that left wing box. For most of them, this is a frightening idea…to consider the ‘other’ side of the story. It is alien to them. It makes them feel uncomfortable and uncertain. They see themselves as doing good––as do-gooders. But that is a pro–active position––at odds with the basic definition of a reporter as one who collects and presents facts.

They are collectively faced with this as a contradiction that they are unable to name because to admit, either consciously or subconsciously, their fundamental anti–Americanism is inconceivable for them.

Their Morality

What today’s mainstream journalists really don’t like is the moral certainty of the economics of capitalism and the philosophy of the American way of life. They see America and capitalism as bad for people.

Capitalism is by its nature judgmental. It rewards those who work and punishes those who do not. The original U.S. Constitution called on people to be responsible for their life and their happiness.

Most journalists do not like the moral certainty of these philosophies. It is not ‘forgiving’ enough for them. They are unable to see that this is what makes a society good and workable. In fact, these journalists refuse to see the consequences of a socialist, collectivist society. When they speak of freedom and individual rights, they speak of them with strings attached.

They prefer to believe that we cannot take care of ourselves, that we have been harmed by society, or that our peers for one reason or another have ostracized us. That is the basic reasoning behind their left–wing agenda. It is inescapable.

They Call It News; It Is Not

They call their reporting ‘news.’ It is not. It is lopsided editorializing with the intent to indoctrinate. That is why their reports can be identified as a mechanical––because every time they write the news they are in lock step with their own ideology.

Most reporters are not beholden to facts or critical analysis. They are like robots that plod along without thinking capabilities. Since the l960s this rote behavior has become a stampede. And like anything out–of–control it must be stopped.

The next time you turn on your TV or pick up your newspaper, look for the obvious––the bias ingrained in those “news” reports. This is the first step in critical thinking about the bias in the left wing media.

Sara Pentz is a journalist, editor/writer and media consultant. She has been a TV news reporter in New York City, Dallas and for CNN in LA. She has hosted radio talk shows. She has been the editor of a variety of  magazines. Her political and ethical commentaries are published at: www.sarapentz.com.

Order Mr. Stolyarov's new comprehensive treatise, A Rational Cosmology, explicating such terms as the universe, matter, space, time, sound, light, life, consciousness, and volition, at http://www.lulu.com/content/140855. You only pay $2.50 for 81 electronic pages of in-depth reasoning. Free previews, descriptions, and information on A Rational Cosmology can be found at http://www.geocities.com/rational_argumentator/rc.html.