In his January 4 article, "Why Journalists Aren't Standing Up for WikiLeaks," Newsweek's Ben Adler offers three reasons, the first of which is quite risible given the media's persistent advocacy for ObamaCare in the year past:
So why are American journalists hesitant to speak up for Assange? There are essentially three reasons.
1. Refusal to engage in advocacy: American journalists, unlike many of their foreign counterparts, have a strong commitment to objectivity and nonpartisanship...
Adler went on to list "opposition to Assange's purpose" and "opposition to Assange's methods" as the other two reasons.
The Newsweek writer didn't examine the notion that perhaps the media are chagrined that Assange's document dump is a massive political and diplomatic headache for President Obama, whom the media generally favor.
Had the WikiLeaks document dump happened on George W. Bush's watch and the former commander-in-chief pursued legal action, would the mainstream media have had the same reticence in defending Assange?
It's a question worth considering, but one unfathomable to reporters like Adler who think the media are above partisan advocacy.
