This is madness for a media struggling to survive: Drudge is reporting that ABC will push President Obama’s health care plan from the White House without presenting opposing views. From the story:
On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care — a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm!
Highlights on the agenda: ABCNEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House. The network plans a primetime special — ‘Prescription for America’ — originating from the East Room, exclude opposing voices on the debate.
In the last four or so years, I have noticed an increasing propensity in the media to only present one side of stories—at least those of concern to SHS, such as assisted suicide, embryonic stem cell research, and radical environmentalism (particularly global warming)—as I have from time-to-time noted here. But this is utterly beyond the pale.
A vibrant independent media is essential for democracy so that ideas can compete. But media increasingly refuses to play its role, preferring the role of a shill. This is one reason why the news industry is dying, it is deprofessionalizing itself in the service of liberal ideology by all too often refusing to be fair, thorough, and accurate.
I also think this was a huge tactical error on the part of the Obama Administration. Rather than debating health care reform, the country will be talking about ABC News’s conversion into a mere propaganda arm of the government.
Update: ABC will moderate a two hour town meeting from the East Room, starring the POTUS. It has sniffed that it will be in control of who attends and that opposing voices will be heard. But this isn’t a fair fight: Asking a question, in the East Room of the White House (I have been there and one is definitely affected), to the President of the United States, is hardly neutral ground or a level playing field. Nor will the structure be conducive to the presentation of a truly informed discussion, including the ability of opposing views to be presented at length, with follow up, correction of erroneous or false statements, or with the same level of visibility to heterodox thinkers, etc. Shills.
