In an earlier post, I said I was going to focus on drilling down to more serious issues regarding the principles of limited government, individual rights and a free market, but I want to address this argument made by The Eclectic Gang, of which Conor Friedersdorf and David Frum are members.
The reason this is my last post on this nonsense is that it does no good to refute their arguments, but I want to try to be clear one last time. The Mainstream Media (MSM) are not "mainstream" because the literate public accepts their reporting as objective and in line with mainstream political thought and values, they are "mainstream" within the world of the media -- the most established. This is changing with the advent of the new media, and many literate readers are leaving MSM sources in droves, regardless of what "ideal" the MSM dreams of at night. The MSM are facing financial problems because they no longer appeal to enough literate consumers of news. The reason the don't appeal to literate readers is their liberal bias in the Information Age, which offers options to the modern liberal narrative.
The MSM bias has become so obvious and subjective that free-thinking individals no longer see them as viable sources of news. John Hawkins has hit a nerve with the Eclectic Gang when he makes the claims that writers like Frum cannot compete in the new media, as it relates to the right, so Frum has to find a niche as a conservative critic in order to get gigs. When Bush was in power, Frum didn't mind writing speeches in the service of the type of conservativsim he now bashes, but when power switched hands and he was thrown the free market of ideas, he was dwarfed by those now fighting liberalism and progressivism, so the only way to survive was find protection again, on the other side now in power. I don't know if this is true, but it's a believeable explanation of why a person would switch allegiances so quickly -- and it would explain Frum's weak resistance to progressivism and stubborn attacks on conservatives -- it makes him acceptable to the MSM.
Our present problems have to do with the direction of statism, not with conservative talk show hosts who are fighting against statism. Friedersdorf explains why the Eclectic Gang are sought after by liberal-biased news outlets as a reasonable choice given the heated rhetoric of Mark Levin and Ann Coulter -- the MSM couldn't possibly give gigs to those with such passionate views and with such twisted ideas of humor. Yet, Friedersdorf defended another member of the Eclectic Gang, Dave Weigel, and said he should be allowed his passion and twisted humor as long as his reporting is solid. It just all seems hypocritical, and I've had enough -- I'm sick of the lack of integrity and intellectual honesty. I'm washing my hands of The Eclectic Gang until they can get over this petty campaign of search and destroy which ignores our most pressing concerns. If they want to be politically eclectic, fine, but eclecticism appears to be an excuse to avoid taking a stand on anything important, and, instead, fighting a petty battle against those who have successfully built an offense against statism. If The Eclectic Gang believes statism is the way to go, then join the Democrat Party, or the pogressive Republicans, and have some integrity -- if not, contribute something positive to the battle against progressivism. This all seems like some never-ending social squabble between college groups vying for popularity than serious writers writing about serious problems.