Must read article from Media Matters - Playing with Fire

In 1971, Edith Efron purported to expose the liberal bias of the news media in The News Twisters. The dubiousness of Efron's conclusion was matched by that of her methods, and critical reaction was harsh. But, under orders from Richard Nixon, Chuck Colson spent $8,000 buying copies of the book in order to vault it onto the New York Times best-seller list.

Even before Efron's book was published, undermining the news media was among Nixon's top priorities. In 1969, Nixon aide Pat Buchanan had proposed blunting media reports about Vietnam by accusing the networks of being biased in favor of the antiwar movement. In 1971, Nixon told top aide H.R. Haldeman, "(M)uch more than any single issue that we are going to emphasize, the discrediting of the press must be our major objective over the next few months."

In fact, the discrediting of the media remained a major objective of the conservative movement for the next few decades. The News Twisters was followed by countless other books making similar allegations. Right-wing groups like Accuracy in Media and the Media Research Center thrived. And Republicans at all levels, from president to precinct worker, routinely attacked the news media.

Not that they necessarily believed their own attacks, as the occasional moment of honesty from conservatives over the years demonstrates. In 1972, Pat Buchanan praised news coverage of that year's presidential election as "extraordinarily fair and balanced." Brent Bozell conceded in the 1990s that major newspapers could not be faulted "with a media bias in favor of Bill Clinton" and praised The Washington Post's (deeply flawed) Whitewater coverage. James Baker has acknowledged that "on balance I don't think we had anything to complain about," and Bill Kristol has admitted, "The liberal media were never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200805090012

in the Olde West, no one was looked down upon more then a horse thief. That was because a horse was more then just 4 wheels...it was companionship and an audience for cowboy songs and harmonicas way out on the prairie range. The people therefore dealt with horsethieves as harshly as they could- they hanged them from the nearest tree. In the modern world, news is sorta like the horse in the old west, ie vital! Indeed, to the settlers, horses meant life itself, and to modern people, news is vital to understanding what's going on. By stealing the news, or poisoning it, or displacing real news with fake news, the thieves are basically spelling ruination for the victims! ...the Ruinited States of America

LUSTS for power, they will do anything to get it lie use cheat steal..because the right wing is basically morally ethically corrupt it is the party for corruption for selfishness and most of all getting power to get your way.The party rationalizes social inequality,authoritarian personality,and it defends sociopath traits in people and in society.

Liberals are not like that or if they are not a true liberal. A liberal should be the opposite of a bully,sociopath or authoritarian.

So like egalitarian accepting wise and generous tribes when confronted with colonialists were enslaved overwhelmed massacred.

The colonizer mind seeks to take over others break them, and control differences in people to change or force them to be like themselves.Hierarchy is threatened by diversity they cannot fit into pigeonholes and order into classes..


The more "tribal" type of mind respects and empathizes and lets others be what they are as long as the whole is not harmed.They are wholiststic.They can tolerate diversity because diversity isn't a threat to a whole.
Wholistic thinking is not able to deal with the violent fragmentation and takeover mentality of the right wing belief systems.Because the right wing belief system is designed by sociopaths able to articulate their dark cold hearts effectively and make it appear rational,realistic in order to destroy the whole where all belong,by denying some a place.

What is the core of the right wing belief system?
Rule to benifiet Sociopaths,socialized.It ":conserves" power to the most ruthless, popular, biggest richest sneakiest bullies of all.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1106902

--the notion that media was "liberal" was just a series of "talking points" that was used as a front for what was really going: corporate financial consolidation of news media power, into a few giant monopolies with tentacles into every form of media--TV, radio, newsprint, newsmagazines, books--as well as entertainment (movies, music, theme parks)--such that a few powerful men, all billionaires, could dictate a fascist political agenda (and fascist imagery) that was ALSO just a narrative, not a real reflection of what people think, but rather a delusionary story they tell as cover for stolen elections and other power grabs.

Rove is, of course, the best example of how this works. He pre-wrote the narratives that made Bush-Cheney's election wins seem plausible. Meanwhile, behind the scenes, he was manipulating the justice system to, a) permit massive election fraud, voter purges and vote suppression go forward, with impunity from the law, and, b) legally went after Democratic voter registration groups and individual politicians. He was, of course, furthermore in cahoots with Diebold (headed by a major Bush-Cheney donor and campaign chair), ES&S (ties to far rightwing causes that would raise the hair on the back of your neck; and manufactures their voting machines for the U.S. "market" in sweatshops in the Phillippines), and a few others highly dubious private corporations. I'm sure this is one major reason he ran his emials through the RNC server, and purged thousands of his emails.

So he would invent issues, and for instance, put anti-gay marriage initiatives on ballots, to "explain" how they won. And I remember reading somewhere, just after the 2004 election, when asked how they won, him saying that it was their "invisible get out the vote campaign in the churches." Of course, the grass roots Democrats that year blew the Bushites away in new voter registration, nearly 60/40. And, of course, our "liberal" media (har-har-har) never asked for any actual facts. They let him get away with crap like this. They let him write the narrative.

So, too, with this, one of the original rightwing narratives--the "liberal" media bias. There was never any such thing. In some respects, the news media of the 1960s and 1970s was a lot BETTER than the tripe we get now. But it wasn't "liberal." It was just more factual, deeper, better written, more serious. But this 'liberal" bias thiing was just flak and cover for what was really happening--which was FINANCIAL. A takeover of the media by global corporate predators for strict fascist control of messages.