Journalists, not

Bruce Johnson
Media bias is no natural occurrence. Talking points issued early in the day can be detected throughout the day, almost verbatim, in arranged interviews and questioning.  Painting the media is the objective. Controlling the discussion their mission.

"Journolist"  was a web-based forum where political operatives and purported journalists met to arrange the spin of the day, agree to drop coverage of certain topics, and even coordinate questionings of certain political figures.

The orchestrated questioning and the symphonic printed media are no mistake.  Coordination of media bias is an arrangement between political parties and a sympathetic media.

I balk at calling these participants journalists.  Journalists have standards. The Journalist's Creed

"The Journalist's Creed was written by the first dean of the Missouri School of Journalism, Walter Williams. One century later, his declaration remains one of the clearest statements of the principles, values and standards of journalists throughout the world. The plaque bearing the creed is located on the main stairway to the second floor of Neff Hall.

I believe in the profession of journalism.

I believe that the public journal is a public trust; that all connected with it are, to the full measure of their responsibility, trustees for the public; that acceptance of a lesser service than the public service is betrayal of this trust.

I believe that clear thinking and clear statement, accuracy and fairness are fundamental to good journalism.

I believe that a journalist should write only what he holds in his heart to be true.

I believe that suppression of the news, for any consideration other than the welfare of society, is indefensible.

I believe that no one should write as a journalist what he would not say as a gentleman; that bribery by one's own pocketbook is as much to be avoided as bribery by the pocketbook of another; that individual responsibility may not be escaped by pleading another's instructions or another's dividends.

I believe that advertising, news and editorial columns should alike serve the best interests of readers; that a single standard of helpful truth and cleanness should prevail for all; that the supreme test of good journalism is the measure of its public service.

I believe that the journalism which succeeds best - and best deserves success - fears God and honors Man; is stoutly independent, unmoved by pride of opinion or greed of power, constructive, tolerant but never careless, self-controlled, patient, always respectful of its readers but always unafraid, is quickly indignant at injustice; is unswayed by the appeal of privilege or the clamor of the mob; seeks to give every man a chance and, as far as law and honest wage and recognition of human brotherhood can make it so, an equal chance; is profoundly patriotic while sincerely promoting international good will and cementing world-comradeship; is a journalism of humanity, of and for today's world."

The latest "open mike" incident where in these purported journalists planned the questions and the timing of the questions to attempt to pin their target to the mat, make him look bad, and shift the focus of the events of the day from the reality, to a manufactured new objective.  From attacks on our embassies, the questioners turned to attacking Mitt Romney.  Their steady cadence of questioning completely changed the topic and the focus, giving the impression of a spectrum of independent and inquisitive journalistic thought which was actually a coordinated assault.  Mischievous and vicious.

In a Romney Q and A following the embassy incidents, journalists seemed to curiously turn their focus en masse, from the issue to politics.  Here is a transcript of the questions.

And some have presented an open mike pre press conference coordination meeting between the journalists that guaranteed the tone and topic of the conference would be pushed in a certain direction.

Add to these recent events, the squelching by certain networks of African American GOP speeches at the RNC, anything about Reverend Wright, Obama's presenter at the 08 DNC turning Republican, the CT Social Security number, facts of Ryan's Medicare Plan, and language from any Democrat questioning Obama. 

Contrast what is asked in accusatory fashion of Romney with that which is asked of Obama.  What is your favorite color?  If you could have just one super power, what would it be?  Obama speaks on his own volition in platitudes and banalities, and is prompted by his journalist "lap dogs"  to speak of the absurd and meaningless.  Fully protected.  But, make sure to stay away from baseball questions. ( Obama bungled the ball park of his alleged favorite team and couldn't name one of his favorite players.)

The Journalist Creed is dismissed as a suggestive list. They seem to believe themselves on a higher calling of adjusting discussion and content to fit their scheme. Can they not see the conflict?  Journalists not.

Media bias is no natural occurrence. Talking points issued early in the day can be detected throughout the day, almost verbatim, in arranged interviews and questioning.  Painting the media is the objective. Controlling the discussion their mission.

"Journolist"  was a web-based forum where political operatives and purported journalists met to arrange the spin of the day, agree to drop coverage of certain topics, and even coordinate questionings of certain political figures.

The orchestrated questioning and the symphonic printed media are no mistake.  Coordination of media bias is an arrangement between political parties and a sympathetic media.

I balk at calling these participants journalists.  Journalists have standards. The Journalist's Creed

"The Journalist's Creed was written by the first dean of the Missouri School of Journalism, Walter Williams. One century later, his declaration remains one of the clearest statements of the principles, values and standards of journalists throughout the world. The plaque bearing the creed is located on the main stairway to the second floor of Neff Hall.

I believe in the profession of journalism.

I believe that the public journal is a public trust; that all connected with it are, to the full measure of their responsibility, trustees for the public; that acceptance of a lesser service than the public service is betrayal of this trust.

I believe that clear thinking and clear statement, accuracy and fairness are fundamental to good journalism.

I believe that a journalist should write only what he holds in his heart to be true.

I believe that suppression of the news, for any consideration other than the welfare of society, is indefensible.

I believe that no one should write as a journalist what he would not say as a gentleman; that bribery by one's own pocketbook is as much to be avoided as bribery by the pocketbook of another; that individual responsibility may not be escaped by pleading another's instructions or another's dividends.

I believe that advertising, news and editorial columns should alike serve the best interests of readers; that a single standard of helpful truth and cleanness should prevail for all; that the supreme test of good journalism is the measure of its public service.

I believe that the journalism which succeeds best - and best deserves success - fears God and honors Man; is stoutly independent, unmoved by pride of opinion or greed of power, constructive, tolerant but never careless, self-controlled, patient, always respectful of its readers but always unafraid, is quickly indignant at injustice; is unswayed by the appeal of privilege or the clamor of the mob; seeks to give every man a chance and, as far as law and honest wage and recognition of human brotherhood can make it so, an equal chance; is profoundly patriotic while sincerely promoting international good will and cementing world-comradeship; is a journalism of humanity, of and for today's world."

The latest "open mike" incident where in these purported journalists planned the questions and the timing of the questions to attempt to pin their target to the mat, make him look bad, and shift the focus of the events of the day from the reality, to a manufactured new objective.  From attacks on our embassies, the questioners turned to attacking Mitt Romney.  Their steady cadence of questioning completely changed the topic and the focus, giving the impression of a spectrum of independent and inquisitive journalistic thought which was actually a coordinated assault.  Mischievous and vicious.

In a Romney Q and A following the embassy incidents, journalists seemed to curiously turn their focus en masse, from the issue to politics.  Here is a transcript of the questions.

And some have presented an open mike pre press conference coordination meeting between the journalists that guaranteed the tone and topic of the conference would be pushed in a certain direction.

Add to these recent events, the squelching by certain networks of African American GOP speeches at the RNC, anything about Reverend Wright, Obama's presenter at the 08 DNC turning Republican, the CT Social Security number, facts of Ryan's Medicare Plan, and language from any Democrat questioning Obama. 

Contrast what is asked in accusatory fashion of Romney with that which is asked of Obama.  What is your favorite color?  If you could have just one super power, what would it be?  Obama speaks on his own volition in platitudes and banalities, and is prompted by his journalist "lap dogs"  to speak of the absurd and meaningless.  Fully protected.  But, make sure to stay away from baseball questions. ( Obama bungled the ball park of his alleged favorite team and couldn't name one of his favorite players.)

The Journalist Creed is dismissed as a suggestive list. They seem to believe themselves on a higher calling of adjusting discussion and content to fit their scheme. Can they not see the conflict?  Journalists not.