The media industry has been infested by the rise of pseudo-journalists who go against journalism's long tradition to serve the public with accurate information, Los Angeles Times Editor John S. Carroll told a packed room in the Gerlinger Lounge (at the University of Oregon) on Thursday.

Guess.

In a scathing critique of Fox News and some talk show hosts, such as Bill O'Reilly, Carroll said they were a "different breed of journalists" who misled their audience while claiming to inform them. He said they did not fit into the long legacy of journalists who got their facts right and respected and cared for their audiences.

Remember? We're supposed to be the bad guys.

Part of the problem of the mainstream media with FNC is that Fox doesn't pretend to be impartial in the same way that many of them pretend to be.

Fox doesn't pretend that the rest of the field is as pure as the driven snow either. Fox dares to cross the line and let everyone else in on the joke: that most of the media are liberal, and that they (Fox) are only providing an alternative.

Does that make them evil "pseudo-journalists," to use Mr. Carroll's terminology?

Of course not! Fox is but an alternative -- and judging by the ratings, an alternative that a significant portion of America is interested in listening to.

It's too bad that Carroll and others like him are so wrapped up in their own self-flaggelation that they don't see that truth.

And if they don't see that; if they only want to report what they feel is "right and just," then the question becomes who actually are the "real" journalists and who are the rumor-mongering "pseudo-journalists?"

(Courtesy Wizbang & blogoSFERICS)

Posted by: mhking at 10:12 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 303 words, total size 2 kb.