Let’s go with media bias for a 1,000

We don’t have to take it from conservative media. Here’s Ted Koppel actually making the good case against the MSM agenda.

Ted Koppel: New York Times, Washington Post ‘decided as organizations’ that Trump is bad for United States

By Brian Flood | Fox News

Journalism legend Ted Koppel feels that The New York Times and Washington Post have both “decided as organizations” that President Trump is bad for America.

“I’m terribly concerned that when you talk about the New York Times these days, when you talk about the Washington Post these days, we’re not talking about the New York Times of 50 years ago. We are not talking about the Washington Post of 50 years ago,” Koppel said on March 7 at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in a clip that was uncovered on Monday by NewsBusters.

“We’re talking about organizations that I believe have, in fact, decided as organizations that Donald J. Trump is bad for the United States,” Koppel said. “We have things appearing on the front page of the New York Times right now that never would have appeared 50 years ago.”

Koppel explained that analysis and commentary didn’t use to appear on the front page, but times have changed since Trump entered the world of politics.

“I remember sitting at the breakfast table with my wife during the campaign after the Access Hollywood tape came out and the New York Times, and I will not offend any of you here by using the language but you know exactly what words were used, and they were spelled out on the front page of the New York Times,” he said. “I turned to my wife and I said, ‘The Times is absolutely committed to making sure that this guy does not get elected.’”

Koppel said Trump’s perception that “the establishment press is out to get him” is indeed accurate.

“He’s not mistaken when so many of the liberal media, for example, described themselves as belonging to the Resistance. What does that mean? That’s not said by people who consider themselves reporters, objective reporters of facts,” Koppel said. “That’s the kind of language that’s used by people who genuinely believe, and I rather suspect with some justification, that Donald Trump is bad for the United States.”

The Times and Post did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

This is hardly the first time Koppel has bashed a mainstream media organization.

Last year, Koppel mocked CNN’s Brian Stelter to his face, telling the “Reliable Sources” host that “CNN’s ratings would be in the toilet without Donald Trump” while on stage for a National Press Club panel discussion.

Stelter responded by asking, “That means what? If ratings are up, that means what?”

Koppel – who anchored ABC News’ “Nightline” for 25 years and has been a working journalist for over four decades — quickly answered.

“The ratings are up, it means you can’t do without Donald Trump. You would be lost without Donald Trump,” Koppel said as Stelter shook his head in disagreement.

“Ted, you know that’s not true,” Stelter said.

“CNN’s ratings would be in the toilet without Donald Trump,” Koppel said as the audience laughed.

There is one little nut he left in there. He said “people who bleive, I suspect with some justification, that Donald Trump is bad for the United States.” Except justification is missing. Opinion is not reason alone for what they do. We never did that en masse to Obama and we had quite the case there for it. Believing he is “bad for America” is not the justification for hatred, resistance and impeachment. There must be real cause.

No, the problem they have with Trump is that he is non-conventional, and they are more than non-conventional in return. If he was conventional, they could apply all their typical radicalism and beat him down. And that would work as usual.

So Trump is somewhat radical in the way he responds. And that is partly why he got elected. It also happens to be the only effective way to react to these rabid leftists.That is the appeal of radicalism, make their own subversive actions hard to respond to.

They don’t want a debate or discussion, no matter how many times they say it. So Ted Koppel inadvertently gets himself caught in a dilemma.

Every time you hear media, politicians or people hypercritically complaining how some problem needs to be dealt with and fixed, remember one thing: they might have a superficial point that does sound good, it is ridiculous in practicality. We must have an effective response to radicalism — no matter what the problem is. Unless you have that, you will not have a real solution. A followup part II is needed for that.

MSM meets cable, or the Hannitization of America … or not

CAUTION: this content requires the willing suspension of disbelief.

Ted Koppel gets Sean Hannity on and tells him, and Fox, he is bad for America.

But wait, ol’ Teddy has kind of a habit of doing that
He told O’Reilly he pretty much ruined the country. (very optimistic)

So Teddy does have that going for him. But then, to be fair to Koppel, he delivered similar commentary about Rush Limbaugh and others. Many others.

What is interesting, though, is what he blames. He accuses Rush for starting it, but that his rise(creation) was only because of the absence of the Fairness Doctrine when that ended. Ah, so ol’ Ted has confidence in the Fairness Doctrine being the cop on the beat.

Well, we know how that worked don’t we?

It was used just as much for censorship as for fairness. And MSM personas like him would be protected as knights of the fairness castle. Everything flowing through them. So Koppel would like to put free speech, and press, back in the bottle if he could… but he can’t.

Thus, he now goes on the circuit railing against these opinionators and pundits as the villains of the news media. No, Ted, you did a fine enough job in ruining journalism, media, America, and confidence in media all by yourself.

Sorry Teddy, the 1st Amendment did not include the Fairness Doctrine, and I’ve also checked all amendments since. Nada. But nice try — even if it sounds so official.

If you wanted Pravda, you could always move to Russia where government will gladly be the arbiter of what news media can say. Got that, Ted?

(Instructions… now grasp handle and press downward to flush.)

Note: I will say he has real points on his “Lights Out” book on a cyber attack and grid concerns. Yet his lights already seem to be out on news channels and media.

(**correction: Koppel interviewed Hannity at length, and chopped it to about 2 minutes)