Wow.
I knew this is essentially what was going on but here it is in print in front of my one good eye.

Remember the "listserv" scandal?
Me neither. 

Because it didn't get much press.
A bunch of "journalists" for liberal news outlets decided to pool resources and also, apparently to coordinate positive coverage for Obama and attacks on conservatives -

Quote:

In one instance, Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama's relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama's conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, "Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares -- and call them racists."

Later, the Daily Caller quotes Ackerman as writing:

I do not endorse a Popular Front, nor do I think you need to. It's not necessary to jump to Wright-qua-Wright's defense. What is necessary is to raise the cost on the right of going after the left. In other words, find a rightwinger's [sic] and smash it through a plate-glass window. Take a snapshot of the bleeding mess and send it out in a Christmas card to let the right know that it needs to live in a state of constant fear. Obviously I mean this rhetorically.

Unquote

The entire sad article here:

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/07/20/daily-caller-exposes-journolist-attempts-to-kill-stories-about/

It's the same issue I've had with the press at large since Clinton/Gore ran back in 1991.

I noticed then an article in the local Jacksonville, FL paper about a Gore speech in which he was quoted as saying something equal to, "Unemployment is going up and the market is going down", which is why everyone should vote Clinton/Gore.

That article was on the front page.  

Somewhere around page 14 were the actual numbers released by the government accounting office which showed unequivocally that "Unemployment was going down and the market was going up."

No one in any of the columns in the paper addressed the fact that one of those to articles had to be wrong.

And, in that case it was Gore.

He was provably wrong or worse lying and the paper made no attempt to expose that their public.

I think that falls under the heading of "journalistic responsibility".

What's been going with the "listserv" is much worse.  

Those involved in that scandal had not merely left out facts or ignored truths or not published articles that would have discredited their chosen political party, they also coordinated their attacks on their "enemies".

This is not journalism - it's partisanship, it's advocacy, it's Kafka-esque in it's very obvious wrongness and yet it's been steadily ramping up over the past 5 years.

Disturbing.

This short video from Dennis Prager's website outlines media bias extremely well.

http://www.prageruniversity.com/Political-Science/Proving-Media-Bias.html

I found these quotes on Thomas Sowell's website:

The study of history is a powerful antidote to contemporary arrogance. It is humbling to discover how many of our glib assumptions, which seem to us novel and plausible, have been tested before, not once but many times and in innumerable guises; and discovered to be, at great human cost, wholly false.

--Paul Johnson2

The first thing a man will do for his ideals is lie.

--Joseph A. Schumpeter9

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

-- C. S. Lewis17