Paul wrote:
Journalism, on the whole, is a career which requires people to be reasonably intelligent, educated, and articulate. And, more than just about any other profession, it's one that requires people to be in touch and well-informed about what's really going on in the world, preferably with some historical perspective.
Well, that's what we fans of Lois Lane and Clark Kent, star reporters for the Daily Planet like to believe.
But it's perhaps a bit of a retro view - there's a really interesting article in the Mar 31 New Yorker on the decline of that type of journalism/reporting. We live in different times
As well, I think Roger has an interesting point about the connection between job choice and personality type and ideological bias.
The other thought that occurs to me is that what passes for a "liberal" or "conservative" varies from culture to culture and from country to country.
For example, both Clinton and Obama have more in common with our Canadian "Progressive Conservatives" than with our Liberal Party. And I would guess both candidates would be appalled by some of the ideas of our New Democratic Party.
In fact, one of our Liberal Prime Ministers was labelled as a "communist by 2 Democratic American presidents. (Kennedy and Johnson)
Also, I think whether you're liberal or conservative varies with 'topic' so to speak. Obama showed he was more conservative than John Kerry when Obama voted against Kerry's resolution in the Senate to withdraw troops from Iraq. Both Clinton and Obama are more conservative when it comes to foreign trade than is McCain. Bush was more liberal on illegal immigrants than were most Democrats in Congress. As a society, I think Americans (and Canadians too) are more conservative on gender issues than Europeans.
Also, the thought occurs to me as I read various US news sites, that perhaps many contemporary US journalists have a touch of the inner fascist, given their focus on the "cult of personality" approach to covering the campaign. Or maybe it's just a touch of inner ET syndrome or inner cheerleader? Who knows?
It may be that each one of us holds both 'liberal' ideas and 'conservative' ideas, tinged with a pinch of old-fashioned guilt
But, anyway, I wonder if it's useful any longer to be using these labels, 'liberal' or "conservative"
Adding, too, that I've enjoyed Ann and Roger's discussion, although some economic stuff wooshes over my head. Too many stats can make me dizzy.
Here's that New Yorker link: (I hope) Apt title, n'est-ce pas?
New Yorker: Out of Print
