California

L.A. Times Runs Most Biased Top Story Ever Published In Any Free-World Newspaper

|

Imagine taking this over your Grape Nuts.

In one of its many books of guidelines, the Los Angeles Times instructs employees to write so that a reader "cannot detect" the political views of the reporter. If there's any place where you'd expect this iron-age rule to be followed, it's in an A1, top-right-column story, which is traditionally considered the leading news story of the day.

So it's not Shane Goldmacher's opinion, just straight news, that the lame-duck governor of California is sending a "gubernatorial ransom note" and "holding the state hostage" in his budget negotiations, thus repeating a "shameful chapter in California's history" and alienating cooperative Democrats with his "ultimatums." It is furthermore objectively true that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is doing this not just from an honest desire to fix Sacramento's chronic budgeting problems but out of personal pique, that he is trying to retrofit a "fiscal system that has bedeviled California—and him—for years."

And when Goldmacher looks down on the former Mr. Olympia's shriveled, sysiphean form, it's just, you know, Crom laughing at your four winds. Here's the lede:

With fewer than 140 days left in office, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is making a final stand for goals that have eluded him for nearly seven years, clinging to an overdue state budget for a last bit of leverage before he fades from relevancy.

A long time ago, in a state far, far away.

It goes on from there, and while some public comments from the governor are included, first-sourcing is given over to such flyblown warhorses as state Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) and Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco).

Speaking of forgettable faces, Goldmacher is so churlish he even tries to hit Schwarzenegger in his Q rating. In Goldmacher's fanciful telling, "the showdown between fellow Republican Meg Whitman and Democratic state Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown" is "increasingly sucking up the political oxygen in Sacramento, much as Schwarzenegger's celebrity did in his first years in office."

Hey, all you folks out there in Televisionland. To the extent that you can even fake an interest in California politics, who do you think is most likely to hold your attention: Jerry Brown, Meg Whitman, or Arnold Schwarzenegger? Put it another way: It's Friday night and your only options at the triplex are Jerry in the Hollywood remake of Monsieur Hire, Meg in an arthouse Annie Oakley biopic, or Arnold as the first male grandmother in Junior, Is That You? Which one might actually entertain you?

If there's a news story here, it is about how little oxygen the Meg and Jerry show has sucked up, and how much CO2 it has generated. As Goldmacher's colleague Anthony York explains, Whitman had to purchase six tables for her own fundraiser at the Hyatt Manchester Ballroom Friday night. And she's doing better than Brown.

Is Schwarzenegger so evil he would actually beggar widows and orphans? He is! Back to Goldmacher:

Schwarzenegger wants more cuts: elimination of California's welfare program and daycare for 142,000 children of low-income families, further paring of education funds and deep cuts in money for home health aides to help the elderly, blind and disabled.

Fair balance: The LAT did give Schwarzenegger space for an op-ed recently. But that was officially labeled as opinion.

NEXT: Why Isn't Liquor Considered a Gateway Drug in Kentucky?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Where’s my house and my job?! I am OWED a house and a job!
    YOU PEOPLE ARE VIOLATING MY HUMAN RIGHTS.
    Right, Sonia? Right, Elena?
    Right.

    1. Don’t forget healthcare!

  2. Everyone knows below the fold is where the real journalism takes place.

    1. True enough. In today’s paper, below the fold has a story about how every product Jackie Chan endorses flops.

      1. I thought everybody loved those bungie cords you tie around your ankles and anchor to the floor while doing spectacular aerial kicks. If you use it long enough you can do your own stunts.

      2. How many ex-Jacor Radio employees are running YOUR newspaper?

  3. Schwarzenegger wants more cuts

    I am so sick and fucking tired of people who use dollars as a proxy for pixie dust and magic-wand-waving.

    This morning on CNBC there was a “debate” about how the government should throw even more money at “higher education” because that will fix our Competitiveness Gap.

    These bozos completely ignore the concept of qualitative distinctions; all money is well spent. Nothing the government does is nonessential.

    It makes me MAD.

    *grinds teeth, rolls eyes*

    1. should throw even more money at “higher education” because that will fix our Competitiveness Gap.

      Heh, funny, I get the idea the gap is actually caused by higher education. GO GATEKEEPERS!

    2. Tell me about it. Education/daycare/helping the poor/etc. are all good things, therefore government spending money on them is good, and spending more is better. Are libertarians and conservatives just cruel? How can they not understand? It’s all so simple!

      1. Money has nothing to do with happiness or success — unless it is government money.

      2. Sometimes I forget if libertarians hate widows or orphans more.

        I think the right answer is blind orphans, right?

        1. Speak for yourself, ratfucker – deaf widows are tops on my shit-list.

    3. I’ve been thinking this a lot lately. As if every education dollar goes right into a classroom, and every welfare dollar goes right into the pocket of a poor person. None of that money goes to support administrative staff in big fancy buildings, and their great benefits packages, right?

      Just once, I’d like a politician say that a budget cut will force us to close an administrative office, cut retirement benefits for paper pushers, or make office workers share cubicles. Because if there were any justice in the world, those things would happen first.

      1. The new education funding of $26 billion wasn’t to hire new teachers or facilities, it was to shore up pension funds destroyed in the sub-prime mortgage meltdown stock & bond crash. Teachers in S. Florida let go last year aren’t being rehired, but the seniority teachers and admin drones are getting their pension funds securitized. CNBC doesn’t tell you that, as NBC is a state-controlled media mouthpiece.

    4. *grinds teeth, rolls eyes*

      He’s on ecstasy! We obviously need to spend more money on drug education.

    5. What America needs is more post-modern Queer Theorist majors.

  4. Remind me again – that little (D) after an elected official’s name – that stands for “douchebag,” right?

    1. I thought it was “dickhole.”

      1. Dumbass, I’m pretty sure.

    2. Despotism.

      1. Dorkwad? Or Demoncrat…..

  5. or Arnold as the first male grandmother in Junior, Is That You?

    God rest Redd Foxx’s smutty soul….

  6. My dad once told me that you get to the “news” portion of a newspaper by removing all the adjectives and adverbs. The remainder constitutes fact. Perhaps not in this case, though.

  7. “holding the state hostage” in his budget negotiations

    If only. I would like to see Ahhhnult broadcasting from his secret lair, hand poised above a big red button, telling the legislators to “Pass ze Bodchit, or I cut you looose.”

  8. In one of its many books of guidelines, the Los Angeles Times instructs employees to write so that a reader “cannot detect” the political views of the reporter.

    I bet they think these views are not political. It’s a common trend among lefties around the world – declaring “what we do is not politics, it’s just common sense”. If only it was true.

  9. There is no liberal media bias.

    1. Reality has a liberal bias.

      1. Can I borrow those beer goggles for a minute?

  10. Teh Children!!! Teh Old Folks!!! Teh externalities!!!

  11. Kudos on the Crom reference. Apparently after 7 years the Govenor still doesn’t know the governments “Riddle of Steal”.

  12. To the extent that you can even fake an interest in California politics, who do you think is most likely to hold your attention: Jerry Brown, Meg Whitman, or Arnold Schwarzenegger?

    Easy one: San Andreas

  13. Talking about the Meg & Jerry show, you mention “how much CO2 it has generated”

    Don’t you mean “hom much CH4 it has generated”?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.