Wednesday, October 27, 2004

The Future Is in Alternative Media

The big media votes
By Cal Thomas

The Big Media — by which I mean the three major broadcast networks and the
"most influential" newspapers (i.e. the New York Times and The Washington
Post) — have been "voting" for the next president for much of the last two
years. In their news pages and on their news broadcasts, the Big Media
have backed any Democrat over President Bush, and now the long-awaited
mystery of which candidate they would officially endorse is over.
May I have the envelope, please?
The winner of the editorial endorsement of both the New York Times and The
Washington Post is: John Kerry. What, you're not surprised?
Reading like a script from Comedy Central's "The Daily Show," The New
York Times claimed in its Oct. 17 endorsement of Mr. Kerry that the
Massachusetts senator is "a man with a strong moral core."
For a newspaper that recognizes no morality except that which it
writes for itself, the Times might have disclosed its "moral code" and
the basis on which it can be deciphered. It certainly isn't rooted in
anything related to what has traditionally been known as morality, for
the Times consistently backs ideas, behavior and opinions that would
have scandalized the once immutable moral code that comes from an
Authority higher than its editorial boardroom.
Regardless of who wins Tuesday's election (and no matter how long it
takes to get the results following expected lawsuits and challenges to
ballots cast by ineligible voters), this may well be the last election
cycle in which the Big Media are taken seriously or regarded as
influential.
The Big Media (let's abbreviate and call them BM) have gone over the
top with this election. They have ripped off their final layer of faux
objectivity, revealing their ideological nakedness for all to see in a
desperate effort to get John Kerry elected.
No good news from the Bush administration is treated kindly by the BM.
Is employment up? They're not the "right kind" of jobs. Is most of
Iraq being pacified, and do many Iraqis speak well of the United
States for ridding them of Saddam Hussein? It doesn't matter, because
pockets of Iraq are unstable and Iraqis can be found who don't like
the "occupation." Any moral convictions held by anyone in this
administration are dismissed as right-wing fundamentalism by the BM as
if the only convictions that matter are their own.
CBS News, which has a credibility gap wider than the Grand Canyon
after it stood behind fake documents pertaining to Mr. Bush's National
Guard service, broadcast a report Friday night by Anthony Mason
questioning whether most Americans are better off financially than
they were four years ago. Mr. Mason claimed that while, on average,
Americans are making more money than they were in 2000, they are "in
fact, worse off." Mr. Mason's proof: "Median household income ... is
now $41,550, $30 lower than it was four years ago."
So, while Americans have more money than they did four years ago,
median household income is down $30, proving to the BM that Mr. Bush's
economic policies are a failure?
There are, and have been, countless examples of the most grotesque
media bias against all things Bush and Republican by the BM. But it
doesn't matter anymore. The BM are the past. Cable, newspapers in
"flyover country" and the Internet are the future. I seriously doubt
whether anyone's mind is changed by the BM's predictable endorsements
and their familiar reasoning, which goes something like this: Big
government and high taxes are good, sex with anyone for whatever
reason is good, abortion and gay rights are good, more regulation of
"evil corporations" (but not the BM corporations) is good and all
conservatives are evil. Anyone sharing the BM's platform gets their
endorsement. Anyone who doesn't gets unfavorable treatment in the news
pages and on the air.
The anger of the BM in anticipation of a Bush win has gone beyond the
fringe of a Michael Moore film or a George Soros 527 group. London's
Guardian newspaper printed a column Saturday by a Charlie Brooker,
who, after mocking Mr. Bush with the familiar leftist invective,
concluded: "The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance
and unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and
save us. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr. —
where are you now that we need you?"
Nice, huh? This is why the media future is in what is called
"alternative media." It will soon become the mainstream.

Cal Thomas is a nationally syndicated columnist.