When anchorman Dan Rather dropped the bombshell about George Bush's
National Guard service, little did he expect it would trigger a crisis
of confidence at CBS News. But once people began to compare Dan Rather's
performance to the antics of former president Richard Nixon, CBS knew it
would have to abandon its strategy of plausible deniability.
When people believe that their news is no longer balanced or objective,
they begin to look elsewhere. That "elsewhere" has come to be known as
the New Media, the thousands of internet sites that have sprung into
existence in the past 10 years.
And it was the internet bloggers who hammered away at the obvious
forgeries in the fake memos. They tracked down the source of the
documents. And it was they who insisted that Rather come clean with an
apology.
But Mr. Rather was not the person who did the legwork on the ill-fated
60 Minutes II show. That task fell to producer Mary Mapes. She's the one
who researched the story and obtained the four fake memos.
One would expect a 60 Minutes producer to be highly objective in her
work. But recently Mary's father, Don, appeared on KVI radio in Seattle.
When asked about the 60 Minutes brouhaha, Mr. Mapes
described his
daughter as "a typical liberal. She went into journalism with an ax to
grind, and that was to promote radical feminism."
So much for journalistic objectivity.
It's no secret that the fem-liberal worldview permeates the Old Media.
The Sisterhood doesn't even bother to deny it any more. Here's Susan
Winston, former executive producer of Good Morning America: "We were
feminists. We were liberals, and most of us still are."
The feminist-driven media rigidly cleaves to three rules in its coverage
of gender issues:
- Portray women as deserving virtually limitless rights, with no
corresponding responsibilities.
- Whenever possible, present men as bumbling fools. If they also can be
shown to be abusive clods, so much the better.
- Never depict men as victims or being treated unfairly.
Take articles about missing persons. People don't normally consider this
to be a gender issue.
But a recent Fox
News article carried this provocative headline:
"Missing Women Grab Headlines, But What About the Men?" The
article rattled off the list of women whose disappearances have gripped
the nation in recent years, and then posed the question, "But where are
all the missing young men?"
Another story
at MSNBC raised the same unsettling question.
Missing men, especially those who are
Black, seemingly don't rate as much media attention as young, white
females.
How can any journalist in good conscience write a story on missing
persons, and then spin the article to pander to the only-women-count
mindset?
The New York Times is one of the most dependable sources of
Ms.-Information. Previous columns have documented how the New York Times
has portrayed
men in a negative light,
biased
its coverage of gender health issues, and
worked
covertly with pro-feminist legislators in the Senate to influence
national legislation.
Author Warren Farrell has come up with a novel theory to explain the
media's neglect of men. He calls it the Lace Curtain, which he describes
as the tendency of the media to view gender issues only from a female or
feminist perspective. His book, Women Can't Hear What Men Don't Say,
documents the head-numbing experiences of male authors who have hit the
estrogen ceiling.
And in his recent book Arrogance, reporter Bernard Goldberg recounts how
CBS talk shows routinely invited radical feminists to appear as gender
"experts."
Some people like to dismiss the New Media as a flaky source of news and
commentary. Jonathan Klein, former vice president of CBS News, recently
derided the internet bloggers as "a guy sitting in his living room in
his pajamas writing."
No doubt the fem-liberal establishment got a chuckle out of that remark.
But they need to face up to this sad but obvious conclusion: When it
comes to men's and gender issues, the Old Media's coverage can no longer
be said to be accurate, balanced, and fair.
