Now, this is not a scientific study, and is no surprise to any honest observer. In fact, the true exposure is not the fact of mainstream media socialist tendencies. It is the state of mind these people have developed. The drink from the cup of feigned objectivity, pop the purple pill of "objective" reporting. At the root a Utopian higher morality, crafted from emotional responses, that supersedes the common man. For instance, when confronted with the obvious fact that the journo in question had made a political contribution, one representative response was:
"I asked for those contributions back," Amantharaman said. "I don't want to comment on this."So, basically if the contribution could be made anonymously... Oh, and imagine a reporter not wanting to "comment" on the fact that they actually have a opinion, are a normal person, and support a certain point of view? All of these newsrooms have policies against complicity, the effect of which is a abstraction in the collective mentality, a virtual group schizophrenia.
What do we, the consumer, sense from such people? That they are crazy, and can't be trusted. Who would you want the news from? Someone who told you the truth about their personal opinions, and then told you their interpretation of news and events, along with the facts? Or someone who told you they were completely objective, yet would not disclose their personal opinions? What do they have to hide? It's denial on a massive scale, and has begun to fail with the public. We just don't trust the mainstream media at all. And winning back that trust is not going to be accomplished by restricting the individuals from comments and contributions. It will just alienate the twisted profession from the real world even further.