When Will Media Take off the Blinders?

As it is hard to find the time to do the searches and research, not to mention the composition, required to write a short post that does justice to a topic, I will again quote at length from a source on the web. (The Wall Street Journal; Best of the Web Today, August 14, 2009):


"The Media and the Haters on the Left Our item yesterday on media coverage of anti-Iraq vs. anti-ObamaCare protests prompted some interesting reader commentary, including this from William White:
The point you make about the media not covering liberal loonies at left-wing protests because such stories would be of dog-bites-man importance has some validity. However, I think you miss two much larger concerns.
First, I do not believe that the existence of left-wing fringe elements at liberal protests is at all common knowledge. Certainly political junkies like us know full well about what really goes on at these rallies. However, I think there is a huge swath of middle America that would be quite startled to get the full picture of liberal protests. I also think that were the media to provide such coverage it would notably alter public opinion on many political topics. (By way of contrast, note how the media cover religion. They almost never cover mainstream religious organizations and activity, but consistently report on religious extremists, and always in a negative light.)
Second, yes, at any political protest you will have elements there shouting, arguing, whatever, that politician so-and-so is a jerk and in bed with special interests and untrustworthy and all that. However, what infuriated me about the antiwar protests when Bush was in office is that the left's level of rhetoric was not just different in degree from what one might commonly see at political rallies but was different in kind. To me, the left became completely unhinged. To regularly brand Bush as Hitler, to regularly refer to the Bush administration as a "regime," to tolerate the not-uncommon calls for Bush's death or assassination reflected a serious change in the nature of political debate in this country. That change was very much a valid news story. In many respects, that change superseded the significance of the war itself. Yet, the media totally and completely ignored and whitewashed the level of lunacy among the left.
Now, maybe I, myself, am an extremist for seeing such an acute liberal bias in the MSM, but, I feel very strongly that the MSM is "at it again." They are working hard to report on fringe conservative protesters as a way to undercut conservative positions when they have regularly ignored the lunacy which exists on the left--and have ignored the size and sway that such extremists hold within the Democratic Party."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204409904574350400852801602.html

The poor job done by the news media in telling us what is really happening is a major cause of most societal problems. If we knew what was going on, we would vote for leaders who proposed solutions to the underlying problems, not to our superficial, though chronic, difficulties. The above quotation and other comments in the cited article demonstrate instances of media reporting based on their own political bias, while ignoring or even concealing obviously relevant evidence that is staring them right in the face. The goals and methods of the left are things that we should know in order to make an informed evaluation of current events. For a long time, the major mass media obviously has wanted us ignorant. Why? That's a good question.