So, why bring it up? Enter MEDIA MATTERS.

This non-profit organization is taking the stand that other talk show hosts are equally guilty of the misdeed(s) Imus has been hanged for. Is it a defense of Imus based upon his politics or is it a defense based upon principal?

Media Matters has this to say about themselves:

• "Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media." [Source]

Side-stepping their presumptuous, assumed ability to "correct" anyone, it would appear that their defense must be in correcting "conservative misinformation" - even though Jesse (the rhymer) Jackson and Al (nappy his own damn seff) Sharpton are far from conservative and were forefront in throwing Imus under the bus. If you look over the Media Matters article, they compare Imus only to "conservative" talk show hosts. The article does not even begin to mention Howard Stern or any other non-conservative host. Is this bias - you bet it is. Is the reason they are not "correcting" themselves because they are not conservative? Smells as bad as Imus.

While there may be many who think Media Matters does a good job or performs some valued service, the idea that they are one-sided seriously devalues their mission right from the start. Bad media is bad media. One who monitors media must monitor all media and point out all misinformation without regard to what cubbyhole it emanates from. How can any credible watchdog organization only seek to discover disinformation from "conservatives"? Does this infer that "liberal" misinformation does not exist or that pointing out liberal misinformation is someone else's job?

The point here is that all mainstream media needs to be held accountable. All misinformation, in whatever form, needs to be pulled into the light of day.

Truth has no party affiliation.

4.16.2007

coldsteeledge.com