Friday, November 07, 2008

Media Bias

I had a VW Vanagon from 1994-97, which I loved but the rest of the family hated. It was not intended to be an off-road vehicle, but it did have a very high clearance and tight turning radius, so I brought it places I wouldn’t bring another car. One 4th of July I decided to take a back road cut-through I had been seeing on the map for two years. Just because I like back roads (when I’m driving).

I don’t know about your state, but in NH, when the sign says “Not A Town Maintained Road: Proceed At Your Own Risk,” they mean that. Even when the DeLorme map says it’s a good dirt road and goes right through, that may not be true. Old Antrim Road in Stoddard has not been maintained for years. Boulders heave up in it, potholes abound, places are moist even in midsummer, and tall grass grows right up to the edge in spots. After that, the road turns bad, especially where unnamed streams cross it.

The Vanagon ended up nose down in the far bank of the largest stream, within sight of where the road got better on the other end. To be fair there was one more even worse place in between, which I never would have made it through, but still…within sight. So I walked back the four miles in the midday sun and got my friends, lots of them, to come push me out. As we were riding in the pickup truck, retracing my route through the forest, proceeding slowly and stopping short of where I had run aground, a friend’s daughter, who was seldom talkative observed “I am trying to imagine what it would have taken to make you turn back.” Ah yes, excellent point, Amy. There are indeed repeated reminders of my bad judgment along this road, aren’t there?

This nicely symbolises what makes conservatives nervous about media bias. Wading through an opposing point of view is not so much the issue as “What would it take for you to ask the hard questions of the other guys?” How bad a scandal, of what nature, with what amount of evidence would cause them to actually investigate one of the favored ones for more than 24 hours? We got a partial answer in the 90’s with Clinton – it has to be about sex or the economy in general (not individual shenanigans) and there has to be a lot of evidence.

So what are they going to investigate now?

3 comments:

(other) Jonathan said...

The MSM didn't abandon the Clintons until Obama surpassed them as a political force. There was, to be sure, a lot of fussing about sex during the 1998 impeachment, but relatively little interest in the Clintons' abuses of power, which were by far the more important issue. It appeared then, and still appears, that the media were happy to find a "scandal" they could focus on as a way to avoid covering the real scandals.

I doubt the media will turn on Obama unless he screws them in some way, which seems unlikely, or some leftist pol eclipses a declining Obama.

Jonathan said...

I liked the Vanagon, it just hated me. Any car that refuses to go into reverse for anyone but you is clearly self-aware.

Dubbahdee said...

You could not have invented a better story to illustrate your point. I hope this Amy person is doing something where her wisdom and perspicacity will be used for the good of all mankind. That was an amazingly insightful statement.
I might borrow this to use in an article or speech somewhere. Do you mind?