The media, uncovered

This is good. I mean, with statements like “politics is a blood sport” and “journalism is war by other means,” both of which I’ve heard in recent months from mainstream media pundits (and aren’t you getting sick of that word? I am) it’s really interesting to watch the more powerful politicians and journalists reveal their inconsistent standards, to put it nicely.

National Review Online has this blog post on media watching that caught one of these exposed moments.

Deborah Howell, Washington Post ombudsman, writes about the media’s “liberalism” (her quotes) in today’s WaPo. In part:

Journalism tends to draw to its ranks those who are idealistic, who want to right society’s ills and who look upon their work as a calling. They look at journalism less as a job with a business than as a calling to public service, which can put them at odds with their own business executives. […]

Journalists tend to be softhearted toward the afflicted or the underdog, which tends to make them less critical of illegal immigrants or poor people in bad straits, and more hard-nosed toward those who wield power.

First, anyone who feels called to public service should probably reconsider his or her job as a newspaper reporter. The news doesn’t strike me as a good or appropriate place to right society’s ills. There are plenty of good charities and worthy causes to donate time and money to. This feeling of responsibility to fix society’s ills also happens to be frighteningly similar to the Democrats’ view of their role in government. It’s scary to think that reporters feel the same way about their jobs as journalists.

In politics and media, there’s a ‘gotcha’ mentality that started getting pretty bad more than a decade ago. The media are increasingly on the receiving end of that. Good to see how much the watchdogs are being watched these days.