Lamar Smith Column: Our National Media Don't Deserve Their 'Mainstream' Title
The modern encyclopedia Wikipedia says, "the term 'mainstream' media denotes those generally reflective of the prevailing currents of thought, influence or activity."
But the opinions expressed by the media are neither widespread nor accepted by the majority of Americans. To call today's national media "mainstream" is inaccurate. They are better described as the "liberal" national media. Regardless, the term "mainstream" should be dropped.
According to a Gallup poll, 55 percent of Americans have little or no confidence in the national media to report fully, accurately and fairly. Americans are right to be skeptical about the news they receive.
How can something be considered "mainstream" if the majority of people lack confidence in it?
Journalists and the public have very different views regarding illegal immigration, for example.
In a Pew Research Center Poll, fewer than one in five journalists said they thought "reducing illegal immigration" was a "top priority." Yet over half the American people rated illegal immigration reduction as a "top priority."
Gun control is another issue where the national media are not "mainstream." According to a study by the University of Connecticut's Department of Public Policy, only 25 percent of journalists listed the Second Amendment "right to own firearms" as being "essential." A Gallup poll conducted last year shows public support for the right to bear arms to be at an all-time high of 73 percent.
In 2008, Investor's Business Daily found that an analysis of federal records showed the amount of money journalists contributed in the 2008 election cycle favored Democrats by a 15:1 ratio over Republicans. Two-hundred thirty-five journalists donated to Democrats, only 20 gave to Republicans.
The national media shouldn't be considered "mainstream" until the majority of Americans and journalists are on the same page. The bias of journalists in the national media has left them not only on a different page than the average American, but in an entirely different publication too.
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) is Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and Co-Chairman of the Media Fairness Caucus. This column also was published at Investor's Business Daily.
- Lamar Smith's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Most of us thinking along the lines of
Submitted by KornKing on Fri, 04/27/2012 - 5:58pm.
Ministry of Information
Who gets their news from them anymore...?
Submitted by NeoKong on Fri, 04/27/2012 - 6:28pm.
That's not what they do now.
They are in the business of keeping us in the dark.
They hide the news more than they present it.
If it is bad for Obama it does not exist.
If it is bad for Democrats it does not exist.
All they do now is campaign for Obama. It's disgusting they way they shill for him.
Rush says it best.
The are the state controlled media.
I get most of my news from the Drudge Report. places like this and off the internet and talk radio.
I'm sick of being lied to.
Yo Lamar!!
Submitted by jdripper on Fri, 04/27/2012 - 6:30pm.
Welcome to the show finally I and almost every conservative that posts on line have been saying that for the past 5 years. What took you so long to realize this simple fact?
Jack
5 Years??
Submitted by powers2be on Fri, 04/27/2012 - 9:08pm.
You must be a young'n Jack. Try 45 Years.
Institutional media.
Submitted by redfish on Fri, 04/27/2012 - 7:32pm.
Institutional media.
They are not journalists
Submitted by ohio granny on Fri, 04/27/2012 - 9:22pm.
They are the democrats' PR Firms. That is the way they should always be referred to. Because they are democrats that means they are liars.
"liberal" national media does not cut it for me
Submitted by needle on Fri, 04/27/2012 - 9:24pm.
I think DNC Media is more accurate; for example this year the top priority for the DNC media is to get Obama re-elected.
- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.
The ONLY reason why Clinton
Submitted by Slyrr on Sat, 04/28/2012 - 12:58am.
The ONLY reason why Clinton wasn't thrown out of office was because ever liberal in the media and in Washington barfed up stories about how 'charming' Clinton's perjury was.
In a sane environment, Clinton's ridiculous excuses and clumsy dismissals would have gotten him not only impeached, but thrown in jail. Any normal criminal caught in purjury would have been crucified if they'd tried to laugh it off by saying 'it depends what the meaning of the word 'is' is'. That alone should have landed Clinton in the slammer.
But the liberal left had so many people willing to not only let it slide, but to laugh it off, that he escaped his just punishments.
And they're doing the same thing with Obama. Obama's presidency has been one continual string of gaffes, screw-ups, failures and outright illegality. If the media were really doing their d@** jobs, they would have handed Obama's head to his wife on a platter before the first year of his term was over, and ran his whole family back to Kenya.
But too many of them have betrayed the people of this country and picked the Demorats as their 'side'. They lie for Democrats. They cheat, they steal, they ignore the truth, ignore the facts and attack the people who actually try to get the truth out.
They're worse than inept. They're traitors to the people.
A new milestone...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 04/28/2012 - 1:20am.
"The ONLY reason why Clinton wasn't thrown out of office was because ever[y] liberal in the media and in Washington barfed up stories about how 'charming' Clinton's perjury was."
Really? Name ONE.
Slyrr, that may be your most absurd assertion...evah!...And you've made some doozies.
Jer
If that is true, Jer, Slyrr's ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 04/28/2012 - 1:56am.
'doozies' are easily matched by your partisan doozies in defense of Slick Willie.
All depends on whose ox is getting gored.
MD
In the annals of dooziness...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 04/28/2012 - 2:19am.
Slyrr is without peer.
Jer
Ecks-shu-ah-lee, Jer, as a ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 04/28/2012 - 2:50am.
lefty on a conservative site, you wrote the book on doozies:
It may be a weighty tome, but it hasn't sold well around here.
MD
Good thing I don't do this for the money...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 04/28/2012 - 3:18am.
or to be popular.
Jer
Ahh, so you post here as part of a--
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 04/28/2012 - 10:06am.
self -help program, eh?
Good thing you aren't expecting any significant progress to ever materialize - as far as convincing any conservative to become either a liberal or to join the Party of the Jackass; otherwise you might want to consider redirecting your efforts towards something truly beneficial as compared to being a lib or a Democrat.
Like, say, teaching classes in advanced basket weaving or underwater yodeling.
MD
I don't think conservatives
Submitted by redfish on Sat, 04/28/2012 - 12:09pm.
I don't think conservatives don't do themselves any good by focusing on the perjury charges; most people think Ken Star was on a witch hunt, trying to entrap Clinton. Maybe it goes against the letter of the law not to punish him, and maybe Clinton was being a sleazeball, but its still made him sympathetic.
Instead, I'll point out that there was evidence of a lot worse crimes, including trading campaign cash from Chinese officials for seats on important commissions, and violating federal law by using White House staff in fundraising activities, but that Janet Reno refused to move on these and appoint an Independent Counsel and that the media didn't want to cover them... so, Republicans, who were frustrated by this, latched on to the first scandal that the media wanted to cover seriously (because it involved sex!), as a substitute for the other scandals that were going uninvestigated.
Doesn't that make more sense?
I don't think conservatives
Submitted by Newsbusterbrown on Sat, 04/28/2012 - 1:31pm.
I don't think conservatives don't do themselves any good by focusing on the perjury charges; most people think Ken Star was on a witch hunt, trying to entrap Clinton. Maybe it goes against the letter of the law not to punish him, and maybe Clinton was being a sleazeball, but its still made him sympathetic.
Okay, but Ken Starr had nothing to do with Clinton perjuring himself in court. Perjury is a felony ("high crime") and an undeniable impeachable act. Slick Willie should have been thrown out of office and been a defendant in criminal court, whatever anybody else felt about his actions.
“There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right.” - Ronald Reagan (1964 Republican Convention)
The word "liberal" also
Submitted by mattm on Sat, 04/28/2012 - 1:22am.
The word "liberal" also doesn't apply.
Never called them that
Submitted by oldfart on Sat, 04/28/2012 - 7:09am.
To me ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN are the LAME STREAM MEDIA.
For people who are incapable of thinking for themselves while they sip their overpriced Starbucks drink.
Still a factor
Submitted by American Delight on Sat, 04/28/2012 - 9:48am.
Unfortunately, the MSM is still at least the "plurality" media.
And most of the original reporting/content comes from liberal reporters/journos working for the AP & likeminded entities.
The intelligent analysis of the news does not occur among those entities. The valuable commentary comes on the Internet, the radio, and conservative outlets.
But until we have more conservative wire services, we're still going to be dependent on the MSM for first-hand reporting.
I remember,
Submitted by misterbee241 on Sat, 04/28/2012 - 9:55am.
as many of you probably do, when the "mainstream" media was all we had. We had to take Walter Cronkite (the must trusted man in America), Dan Rather, Peter Jennings et al, at their words, being objective journalists that they were.
But back in the 60s, when Vietnam was going on, i was a teenager, i started suspecting the media of not being above board. I recall stories coming out of Vietnam that were just unbelievable.
When Watergate happened, the media was saturated with it. I did know the media wanted Nixon's scalp. I thought it was because he was a republican. No, it was because he was an anti-Communist, who won against two liberal democrats in a landslide. Watergate was the Democrat's and the media's payback to Nixon for winning.
I remember in 92, I was watching Dan Rather reporting on the election. Every time Clinton won a state, Rather's smile got bigger. I think the mask was off then. I also stopped watching CNN because it became the Clinton News Network. And during the Time Of Clinton's Troubles,, all the media was behind him, giving daily polls that showed the majority of America wanted it all to go away, it was only about sex, and Clinton was doing a great job. I had a hard time accepting that as reality.
But over time the truth about those "crusaders" came out. Uncle Walter really was a pinko, just like Archie Bunker said. So were the others.
I dont even watch "mainstream" media anymore because I got so sick of the liberal slant from years ago. Now we have a place we can go and get the news, if maybe not completely truthful, at least from another perspective.
The King has been dethroned.
Not Mainstream and also not Journalism
Submitted by Netstatter on Sat, 04/28/2012 - 10:00pm.
I agree that the "Mainstream" Media is mis-named. I have known it in my gut for a long time that the "MSM" is hardly anywhere near mainstream America. Since so much of it is "in the tank" for the Democrat party, a better moniker would be to call them the Propaganda Media.
But not only are the MSM not mainstream, it is made up of a great many who don't live up to the noble calling of that Free Press in the First Amendment to the Constitution. If they did, they would comport themselves as professional journalists and by definition would not be "in the tank" for one political ideology. Were they really living up to that noble calling, the Media would be The Watchdog of Democracy in spirit and truth. But as it is, most of these workers populating the MSM wouldn't know real journalism if it bit them on the rear. They are merely mouthpieces.