Someone check the cider bowl at the New York Times Christmas party. Looks like it was spiked with some wacky wassail weed, and that Paul Krugman drank deep—very deep—from it.
In his Humbug Express column today, the honoree of a fringe Scandinavian leftist group claimed—apparently lost in the throes of cider-induced delusions—that the left's ability to promulgate its propaganda is dwarfed by the right's. In the world according to Krugman, the culprit is a conservative "media infrastructure" that the lefties can't match.
The specific issue at hand was whether government employment has increased under Pres. Obama. Krugman claims that the right has managed to propagate the urban legend that indeed it has, whereas Krugman claims it hasn't.
But the bigger point is Krugman's fact-defying assertion [emphasis added]:
"[T]here’s a well-developed right-wing media infrastructure in place to catapult the propaganda, as former President George W. Bush put it, to rapidly disseminate bogus analysis to a wide audience where it becomes part of what “everyone knows.” (There’s nothing comparable on the left, which has fallen far behind in the humbug race.)"
Do we really need, yet again, to compare the left vs. right media array?
On the port side, we'd start of course with none other than Krugman's own home base of the New York Times. Include every other major newspaper with the exception of the Wall Street Journal [and even there its non-opinion pages point left].
Add in the three broadcast networks, MSNBC, CNN, PBS, NPR, academia, Hollywood, most major foundations, and countless liberal blogs—and you have a mighty media infrastructure indeed.
And on the right? Fox News, talk radio, and some websites. Pretty puny in comparison.
To allay his startling symptoms, we'd prescribe for Paul a dose of reading NewsBusters for a week. Call us after New Years if the illusions of a lack of left-wing media haven't subsided.
