A Liberal Entrée of Media Dish
Thomas F. Roeser is the chairman of the editorial board of The Chicago Daily Observer, and a regular columnist there of some considerable talent.
He has served up a generous course of media dish with his latest column, "How the Liberal Media Stonewalled the Edwards Story." (h.t., Newsalert, here).
Roeser simply left no large stones undisturbed. None.
Addressing the general and perennial accusation of "progressive" bias in the media, as manifested by to the failure to pursue this story, Roeser pegged that right off with two equally harsh and unequivocal diagnoses, each one having spilled, scent and all, right from an offending source:
Two journalistic liberals now attest to the fact. Howard Kurtz, media critic for The Washington Post last week blasted his mainline journalistic colleagues for trying to snuff out the truth because Edwards is a fellow liberal. He wrote, "the widespread allegations…were an open secret that was debated in every newsroom and reported by almost none." He was joined by Clark Hoyt, ombudsman for The New York Times whose job is to determine how impartial his newspaper is. He wrote, "The John Edwards 'love child' story finally made the national news media and made the front page of yesterday’s Times. For weeks, Jay Leno joked about it, the internet was abuzz and readers wondered why The Times and most of the mainstream media seemed to be studiously ignoring a story of sex and betrayal involving a former Democratic presidential candidate who remains prominent on the political stage."
Hoyt harshly condemned his employer: "Before Edwards' admission, The Times never made a serious effort to investigate the story, even as [The National Enquirer] wrote one sensational report after another."