Journalist quits newspaper job: claims liberal media bias
Joseph Earnest February 22, 2013
journalist John David Dyche quit his job at The Courier-Journal, after the
newspaper rejected and refused to publish his column. Dyche had suggested
several reforms the newspaper needed to make in order to remain competitive
in the marketplace.
was told by the Editorial Director Pam Platt that his column would not be
published because it did not reflect what he was supposed to be writing,
which was a conservative take on the issues of the day. Dyche responded
by saying conservative issues include "liberal media bias".
"I never had a column censored or refused before," Dyche told WFPL Radio,
Friday. "I wrote about things that were interesting to readers and
things that were public issues. I thought this was both. Media bias, the
status of newspapers, et cetera. This seemed to me to be interesting,
and the only problem apparently was that it was about The
Courier-Journal itself. They just don't seem willing to subject
themselves to the same scrutiny and demands that they routinely subject
to WPLF FM, Platt's predecessors—David Hawpe and Keith Runyon—never rejected one of his columns.
"No. 1, they need some revolutionary ideas or they're not going to
exist much longer," Dyche said. "No. 2, the newspaper claims essentially
a quasi-governmental status under the First Amendment, and they demand
disclosure of everything else from everybody else in government.
claim that the reporters and editors can put aside their personal
biases and be fair and objective. Maybe they can—but why not give
readers the information about where these reporters and editors are
coming from politically themselves, then readers can make a more
informed assessment. Are they being fair or are their biases creeping
into the coverage?"
media outlets that have exhibited blatant liberal bias find themselves either
running out of business or struggling to stay afloat. Even the once-objective
Reader's Digest is now filing for insolvency and has seen its readership
drop by two-thirds, ever since its editors gave it a liberal slant. Reader's
Digest doesn't seem to get it though, and
is now blaming writers on the Internet for tapping into its market share.
America is another outfit that was rendered irrelevant by the dominating
force of talk radio that embraces objectivity. Even Al Gore's Current
TV decided to become cheerleaders for liberals and due to non-existent ratings,
Gore recently sold it to the Qataris.
cable news and the Internet, are media outlets that focus more on informative
material, instructive content and solutions to fixing problems, rather than
campaigning for liberal rights related to pycho-social issues and behavioral
choices. Even foreign media outlets in America find it impossible to hide
their liberal bias and are failing to gain traction with American viewers.
Washington Times says the "news" is little more than political campaign for a particular
party. Every subject is skewed and skewered to the point that
everything you see hear and read should be taken with the proverbial
"grain of salt."
London Guardian is even more critical of CNN, which is a liberal outlet.
The Guardian asserts, CNN International aggressively pursued a business strategy of extensive, multifaceted
financial arrangements between the network and several of the most
repressive regimes around the world which the network purports to cover...the
network's pursuit of and reliance on revenue from Middle East regimes increased
significantly after the 2008 financial crisis, and caused the network
to suffer significant losses in corporate sponsorships,"
London Guardian wrote in this extensive article. (pop-up)
journalist has always maintained that the only way to practice pure journalism
is to become and independent journalist, and start one's own media outlet,
where one has 100 percent editorial control of the content, and is not a
slave to the Matrix.
copy of John Dyche's column that was rejected by the Courier-Journal can
be read below, courtesy WPLF Radio: —by
John David Dyche
In an obvious oversight, The Courier-Journal’s new
publisher, Wesley Jackson, has not contacted this columnist for
suggestions on saving the newspaper from the fate of the New Orleans
Times-Picayune (which produces a paper edition only thrice weekly) or
worse. Jackson has implemented reforms related to financial viability
rather than content, but the latter affects the former. So here, free of
charge, are some ideas to promote this publication’s prosperity.
Opinion Pages. The Courier-Journal opinion pages are stridently
liberal. Journalistic jihads against Kentucky’s Republican U. S.
Senators, Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul, and crusades for gun control
and higher taxes, are in full force and frequently fill almost the
entire editorial and op-ed pages. Such one-sidedness neither works in
the marketplace nor serves the public interest.
Make the current
editorial page (i.e., the page on the left) into a “Left Page” and there
continue presenting hopelessly liberal columns, cartoons, and letters.
Convert the op-ed page (i.e., the page on the right) to a “Right Page”
and present conservative/libertarian columns, cartoons, and letters now
largely absent from Louisville media. Give each page equal resources,
and let the competing philosophies battle it out in the marketplace of
ideas. The community would benefit from real, vigorous debate, and
subscribers who deserted the paper due to its liberal bias might return.
Editors’ and Reporters’ Politics. Like the rest of the press, The
Courier-Journal claims to play an exalted role in public affairs. But
while righteously demanding absolute openness and full disclosure from
every other entity and person involved in government, the press does not
apply the same standard to itself. Change that by disclosing the party
registration and voting choices of all editors and reporters.
believe that they, unlike mere mortals, can transcend their personal
opinions to be basically fair and objective in presenting the news.
Perhaps, but readers should be the ones to judge. To do so, they need
information about the personal political views of the editors and
reporters who decide what gets reported, and how, when, and where it
gets reported. If a Courier-Journal editor or reporter is a registered
Democrat who has voted twice for Barack Obama and Steve Beshear, advise
the readers of that fact and let them make their own evaluation about
whether those political preferences are influencing the coverage.
Meetings and Records. The Courier-Journal not only demands, but often
litigates to ensure, full and open public disclosure of meetings and
records of government bodies. It should apply the same standard to
itself given the prominent role the press proclaims for itself in the
political process. So live stream the meetings of editors and reporters
and post the written communications and directives between them
regarding assignments, policies, and stories.
Let the public see
how and by whom decisions are made as to what to cover, who should cover
it, and what headlines, photographs, and placement it receives. For
example, the recent confirmation hearing of secretary of defense nominee
Chuck Hagel received only two sentences of coverage below the fold on
A3 in The Courier-Journal. The paper presented no hint of the bumbling,
confused, and altogether incompetent performance by the potential head
of the Pentagon.
A three-sentence dispatch about a sacrificial
skull mound in Mexico dating to 660 A.D. ran below the dispatch about
the Hagel hearing! And a few days later a much longer article entitled
“Pentagon to extend benefits to partners” appeared above the fold on A2.
Newspapers indignantly proclaim that their
editorial and news departments do not coordinate. Perhaps there is no
explicit conspiracy, but the hand-in-glove relationship between such
ideological soul mates is undeniable. Opening up the process might not
prevent such slanted presentation of news in the service of liberal
objectives, but it could deter and expose it.
Publish Value of
In-Kind Contributions. The Courier-Journal decries the influence of
corporate money in politics and demands better disclosure of political
contributions. However, The Courier-Journal, Inc. and Gannett Company,
Inc. are corporations that try to influence politics. Presumably their
efforts have some value. The newspaper should therefore quantify and
report how much its in-kind contributions in the form of editorials,
endorsements, etc., would be worth if valued at the rate of
Finally. Replace Fort Knox and
Jump Start with Mark Trail and Mary Worth in the comics. These soap
opera strips are much funnier, albeit unintentionally. And if you do
nothing else recommended here, enlarge Peanuts so one can more easily
read its often profound social commentary. Good grief! Add