
It’s become all the fashion these days to bemoan the loss of the “Watchdog” press. But in a world where we know more about Britney Spears’ underwear than we do about the policies of our president elect, I find the idea laughable. The truth is, because the press has long ago chosen to openly advocate for liberal candidates instead of being evenly critical to both parties, they have been far more lap dog than watchdog, and I think that’s contributed to their demise.
Here is the Newark Star Ledger’s Paul Mushline making the typical complaint for the Wall Street Journal. He claims that journalist’s great contribution to western civilization is that they can wade through the information bog and provide an ‘executive summary’ for their less patient readers. And while that may be technically true, what happens if the summary they provide is intentionally misleading? Or suppose instead of being more or less non partisan they instead characterize positions the author doesn’t agree with as stupid while calling positions they do agree with wise? Or suppose the author lacks the knowledge or wisdom to accurately reflect the salient issues at all…what is their ‘executive summary’ worth then?
Or suppose they are just so concerned with self aggrandizement, that they’ll say anything at all, however nonsensical, so long as it increases the relative importance of the journalist in influencing public policy? Mushline himself is an excellent example of that. Based in Newark, arguably one of the most corrupt municipalities in America, he’s been happy to lick the hand of any corrupt politician who is looting the coffers, so long as that politician pays him the lip service he feels he’s due. He’ll inevitably report on the charges, the prosecution and the conviction as well… but so long as the politician is showing ‘respect to the media’ he’ll be happy to act as his mouthpiece with the electorate right up until the moment of conviction. So long as the politician is a Democrat every pitch is a softball where the Newark Star Ledger is concerned.
When I met my wife she had a miniature Yorkshire Terrier as a pet. She was a charming dog, and good company. She was hugely affectionate and pretty smart as far as dogs go. But we never believed we were any safer having her around the house. If someone broke in to our apartment the dog would simply wag her tail or curl up at their feet while they robbed us blind. That’s what the Newark Star Ledger journalists are like. They aren’t part of the watchdog press and haven’t been for years. They are just little Yorkies curled up at the feet of the Democratic Party of Essex county. Their personal affection for big government has long prevented them from being able to tell friend from foe among our elected officials.
To tell you the truth, if the Newark Star Ledger had been anything but a uselessly partisan rag then they might have been able to count on my continued interest in what they have to say. But as it is, I already know their position on everything. They are infallibly pro big government, pro-democrat, and pro-elitist in their views. It’s a position they reflect on the front page as well as the opinion page, and it’s almost insulting how transparent their positions have become. I find their reporting to be insulting to my intelligence, and if I want to have my intelligence insulted like that I can read the New York Times.
If Paul Mushline wants to believe he’s been providing a valued public service by imparting his greater wisdom to the unwashed, it’s no sweat off my nose. But as a consumer of what he produces, I for one will be glad to be rid of his condescension, his contempt, and his partisanship. And the same goes for virtually all of his peers. If they were really going to be watchdogs it might be different. But they haven’t filled that role for ages, so I see no reason to rely on hem. I have no problem with lapdogs, but they aren’t protecting anyone. The same is painfully true of New Jersey’s ‘watchdog’ press. And in a state where the citizenry is pretty much continually lied to by its politicians through the press, the very idea of them as watchdogs strikes me as one of the more ambitions distortions I’ve ever heard.















