Well, at least they've admitted it at last. Liberal media journalists admit they want to report only what they perceive as truth. They're annoyed that anyone would want to question them on it or to hear all sides of a given issue.
A panel of liberal journalists and media analysts declared yesterday that news organizations should promote "truth" over "balance."
That's another way of saying that the American public is too stupid to decide wherein lies the "truth" but the intelligent media is and will decide and tell the people what it is.
"The discussion that we have to have balanced reports is kind of crazy," said Linda Foley, President of the Newspaper Guild.
Josh Silver, executive director of the Fair Press media reform organization said, "Take global warming. The US is the only developed industrialized country that still debates in the mainstream media whether or not global warming is happening." Global warming, he suggested, is an example of the truth.
Okay, let's look at what this pseudo-intellectual liberal considers "truth:"
Obviously Silver is not "up" on the issue of global warming to know about the recent world-wide survey of climate scientists and the result of that study.
In the results of a survey of climate scientists conducted in 2003 by Professor Dennis Bray of Forschungszentrum, Geesthacht, Germany, one question on the survey asked "To what extent do you agree or disagree that climate change is mostly the result of anthropogenic causes?"
A value of 1 indicates strongly agree and a value of 7 indicates strongly disagree. Countries, and number of responses from each country are as follows:
USA n = 372;
Canada n = 14;
Germany n = 56;
Italy n = 14;
Denmark n = 5;
Netherlands n = 4;
Sweden n = 5;
France n = 5;
U.K. n = 18;
Australia n = 21;
Norway n = 3;
Finland n = 3;
New Zealand n = 6;
Austria n = 3;
Ethiopia n = 1;
South Africa n = 3;
Poland n = 1
Switzerland n = 7;
Mexico n = 3;
Russia n = 1;
Argentina n = 1;
India n = 3;
Spain n = 2
Japan n = 3;
Brazil n = 1;
Taiwan n = 1;
Bulgaria n = 1
To the question posed above there were 530 valid responses. Descriptive statistics are as follows:
Mean = 3.62; Std. Error of mean = .080; Median = 3.00; Std. deviation = 1.84;
Variance = 3.386
1 strongly agree 50 (9.4% of valid responses)
2 134 (25.3% of valid responses)
3 112 (21.1% of valid responses)
4 75 (14.2% of valid responses)
5 45 (8.5% of valid responses)
6 60 (10.8% valid responses)
7 strongly disagree 54 (9.7% of valid responses)
These results, i.e. the mean of 3.62, seem to suggest that consensus is not all that strong and only 9.4% of the respondents strongly agree that climate change is mostly the result of anthropogenic causes. This is however, a slight rise in consensus of the same survey conducted in 1996  that resulted in a mean of 4.1683 to the same question (Five countries USA, Canada, Germany, Italy, and Denmark only in 1996 survey, N = 511).
So actually more scientists world-wide believe that global warming is not caused by man and most of the scientists are somewhere in the middle. Those, I suspect, are the ones most influenced by economic issues (grants to prove global warming is caused by hydrocarbons, etc.) and by media hype.
The area of global warming, it seems, is an area where the media, for reasons of its own, has decided where the truth lies -- in direct opposition to what is actually true.
The liberals on the panel were highly "put out" by the fact that the public wants to know exactly what is happening, good and bad, true and false, rather than being spoon fed opinions. Their arrogance in even daring to state these things publicly shows how far down the road of media dictatorship we've gone.
Their laziness in reporting only one side of issues should be grounds for dismissal and banishment from the profession (at least it WAS a profession) of journalism. Too bad we can't take them to court, convict them for biased reporting and intellectual snobbism and banish them to a deserted. preferably barren island somewhere in Indonesia.