Working the refs, exhibit #1285690

Atrios points his readers to this mea culpa by NY Times reporter Adam Nagourney, but for some reason he fails to point out that within the mea culpa is a great example of how the right's "working of the refs" to attack the So-Called-Liberal-Media (SCLM) has resulted in this faux concept that we now call objectivity. Say Nags:

With all that said, mea culpa. Over the course of the campaign, beginning with the primaries, because I knew deep down that I supported John Kerry, and through the Presidential election, because I knew his opponent wanted to demonize people like me, I found it necessary to write in such a way that would make people believe the opposite. This is called being objective, I will not apologize for that. However, there were times when I had to sort of exaggerate or report things “imprecisely” in order to be objective and though I will not apologize for that, I will acknowledge that some people might think I should.

However, there were occasions where I derided Kerry for such subjective things as a lack of charisma, even in comparison to myself. This was not objective. Obviously when comparing yourself to a candidate, you may give yourself “extra points”. Please remember though, John Kerry is tall. Studies show taller people generally have an easier time with things- they slide by. When I was at USA Today, before I was at the Times, I was the third shortest person on the political beat. The point is, however, that I was on the Charlie Rose Show at the time of said indiscretion, which, if any of you have ever been on (I’ve been on numerous times), you know, Charlie expects you to have such things to say.

Hell, Nags even says he doesn't apologize for kow-towing to the absurd definition of objectivity that we adhere to these days which basically states that if you personally lean left, you need to make your readers think you are to the right. WTF? I also don't have much respect for writers who knowingly skew their coverage to avoid the truth to avoid criticism, but to attack Kerry because you still have issues over your own height and then blame Charlie Rose in a "the devil made me do it" move deserves the utmost contempt. At least he apologizes for conflating events and ideas of completely different magnitudes in order to seem "objective" but I kinda doubt that is going to change the kind of writer he is.

Anyway, when you hear the right go off about the "Librul Media" point out crap like this... not only does the right have a hegemony on many aspects of the media (ownership, pundits, publishers, radio, cable) but they also force other outlets to lean right, or at least be dishonest in their reporting, by virtue of their scorn and cries of bias. I doubt you will be seeing any mea culpas from the right anytime soon.

For more on this stuff, go read this book.