| | The whole business of dividing up the talking heads into those that claim to be impartial news reporters and those who are advocates allows a lot of funny business to go on.
Those of low integrity will pretend to an objectivity they don't have and slant the news to suit a hidden agenda, while claiming that they are only doing news.
Those who are open about the position they advocate for will be dismissed as partisan despite the fact that they may be the only one breaking real news on a particular subject.
Stossel's column was great - he described being subjected to an on-air inquisition where his objectivity was questioned by a group of 'journalists' whose shared trait was their hidden left-wing bias, and their willingness to use their fraudulent credentials of non-partisanship to beat up on Stossel for being open in his advocacy.
Beck and Stossel both mix news and advocacy in an open and honest fashion. Their facts get checked and rechecked just like any reputable journalist. The reason that Stossel's speech to AFP would be objectionable for a straight news reporter is the unrealistic, dishonest and hypocritical pretense that a straight news reporter doesn't have any political beliefs. How stupid would that reporter have to be for that to be true, and how stupid are we supposed to be to believe that.
|
|
Then, gradually, I figured out that business, for the most part, treats consumers pretty well. The way to get rich in business is to create something good, sell it for a reasonable price, acquire a reputation for honesty and keep pleasing customers so they come back for more.
