Recently, I had a conversation with a liberal law professor about government policy and bias in the media. I argued that there was government failure. The media was dominated by liberals and the government supported liberal public television and radio, which reinforced that domination. This could not be justified. Instead, it was an example of the dominant group exercising their power in both the private and government sphere.
The professor countered that while public broadcasting was liberal, the private media was capitalist, implying that public broadcasting was providing something that was missing from the private sector.
I thought of this conversation the other day when I read the New York Times the morning after Hillary Clinton’s acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention. During the entire Republican Convention, including after Donald Trump’s acceptance speech, the Times had negative headline after headline. I should have taken a screenshot of it, but did not think to do so ahead of time. But after Clinton’s acceptance speech, I did take a screen shot. The stories were uniformly positive, and in some cases triumphant. The titles: “Clinton Declares Election a Moment of Reckoning,” “Nomination Claimed and a Barrier Falls,” “Clinton Makes History, and Wears It, Too,” “Writing Her Own Story,” and on and on and on. No one could reasonably claim that the Times was impartial about these matters.