I certainly don’t need a report from the Media Research Center (MRC) to tell me that liberals hate the word “liberal” and hardly ever use it to describe themselves, while they liberally use the word “conservative” or “extremist” to describe us. Known it for years.
It’s simple, really. Mainstream media is dominated by liberals, who really believe they represent ordinary Americans. To them, conservative views are “extreme” or “right wing.” When was the last time you heard Katie Couric describing a Democrat or Hollywood type as “left wing” or a “liberal extremist?”
MRC’s Rich Noyes writes:
“It’s not that network reporters misuse the ‘conservative’ label. Rather, journalists systematically fail to identify those who seek a secular society and a strong, government-controlled, social welfare system as ideologues of the Left. The media’s labeling scheme presents ‘conservatives’ as less mainstream than their ideological adversaries, even as election returns show that it’s liberals who need to start swimming back to the center.”
That’s pretty close to what I think. I’ll go a step further. Although liberals like to use it as a slur, I’m not offended or repelled by the term “right wing.” In fact, the best way to diffuse something intended as an insult is to embrace it. Whenever liberal bloggers call me a right winger, I say, “Yeah, that’s what I am. But you spelled my name wrong and didn’t link to my blog. That hurts.”
Last year I blogged about a Pew study that showed liberals in media call themselves “moderates” instead of liberals. It’s amazing that people who believe in child killing on demand are moderates, yet people who want to protect unborn life are extremists.
While liberal journalists are only moderately annoying, bloggers who blog about me without linking are extremely annoying.
You’ll always get a link from me, LB.
And though I may refer to you and other conservatives as “right-wing” from time to time, I certainly don’t EVER mind being called “liberal,” “left-wing,” or “extremist.” They’re just labels. I’m proud to be liberal and left-wing.
Like you, I’m most annoyed when people don’t link. Talk about me all you want…but link to me!
Comment by Mike M. — 05.12.05 @ 10:56 am
I’m with Mike M - I don’t find “liberal” an insult, though I do think the way it is used is generally inaccurate. That may be a transatlantic thing. “Left wing” and “right wing” aren’t insults in my book either. Americans tend to use socialist as an insult though - I’ve heard it being invested with real venom. I receive it as a badge of honour.
And if I talk about you, I’ll always link.
But you knew that.
Comment by Richard Hall — 05.12.05 @ 11:22 am
As a self-described right winger I’m amused when liberals and their pals in the MSM try to blur what is “mainstream”. The real RIGHT WING is RARELY discussed honestly in any media. Conservatives are actually the Mainstream! Right wingers, I don’t claim to speak for all, believe in things like……..
1. Reduce federal govt. by 90%
2. Eliminate unionization of govt. employees.
3. End wars on, drugs, poverty, racism et. cetera…
4. Modernize systems of Representation to benifit taxpayer, not deadlocked bureaucrats.
I can’t think of a SINGLE republican in the Senate or even the House that holds these positions. Yet the democrats and the media will daily label them “Right Wing”? What’s up with that?
Comment by pajamazon — 05.12.05 @ 12:59 pm
I understand where you are coming from. My family is divided, 1 Liberal, 2 conservatives. I work here in DC with my brother the Liberal, uh-hum the Moderate, excuse me! Anyhow I’ve noticed the same thing. That leftist ideas are in the center and anything I think is of as in the center is the right-wing agenda. The best way I can say it, “Bigot, a conservative winning an argument with a liberal”. At least my brother and I have decided to agree to disagree and leave it at that. It just causes to much family tension. Leave your politics at the door please. The other comment I have. I don’t mind being called conservative or right-wing, I call it right-thinking, LOL!
Comment by Steve Lowery — 05.12.05 @ 1:03 pm
LB, what defines a liberal?
What defines a conservative?
Is there a hard line between the two, meaning if you hold some “liberal” views and hold some “conservative” views, what makes you one or the other?
If there is a true spectrum, then doesn’t that negate the use of the terms?
Comment by DarkStar — 05.12.05 @ 1:15 pm
I get called “liberal” by “conservatives” and “conservative” by “liberal”.
I resent both because neither can answer the questions I posed. So far, across the board, I’ve determined that no one has a clear handle on the terms. And all it does is allow sloppy and lazy thinking, even from those who are thoughtful.
Comment by DarkStar — 05.12.05 @ 1:17 pm
Daily Show Joins the Bloggery
via The Political Teen, I just watched the video of the Daily Show’s new blog roundup.
For those of you who don’t know, the Daily Show is joining a new trend in the msm. MSNBC already has a blog roundup on Coast to Coast (hosted by smart bloggers…
Trackback by Fresh Politics — 05.12.05 @ 1:26 pm
The problem, or at least the phenomenon, is that liberals try to hide from their own philosophy when identified with it, while conservatives welcome their identification as such.
The reason is obvious. Liberals know that their political and social agenda does not sell well to a majority of Americans, so they run and hide behind bogus labels like “progressive.”
Comment by RedBeard — 05.12.05 @ 1:29 pm
LaShawn, perhaps you could have a contest. We need to ween ourselves off of the term “Main” Stream Media(MSM) to describe liberal media. Calling them Main Stream is giving them the moral middle ground from which they can launch assaults like “extreme” and “right wing”.
Perhaps “X Stream Media” could catch on, or, “Left Stream Media”. What say you?
Comment by BuckTownDusty — 05.12.05 @ 1:41 pm
ps.
It’s obvious to me that the media likes to talk about slave ships, chains and whips
or black crime, welfare mothers, and Jessy the race pimp.
And, it doesn’t matter what side of the “Talk Line†you’re on
You’ll find yourself trapped behind the chalk line being drawn
And the media massa is doing all the snapping.
Comment by BuckTownDusty — 05.12.05 @ 1:44 pm
Anyway, La Shawn Barber points out that Liberals Hate The Word ‘Liberal’ They can change the word all they like. They can […]
Pingback by Crowhill — 05.12.05 @ 4:55 pm
This “study” has been soundly debunked by Media Matters:
http://www.preemptivekarma.com/archives/2005/05/it_couldnt_just.html
Enjoy.
Comment by carla — 05.12.05 @ 7:07 pm
I’ve noticed that libs generally hate being called a “liberal” yet lement that society looks at the label “liberal” with negative connotations.
On the other hand- I’ve also noticed that conservatives prefer being called conservative- much more so than being called “Republican”.
I wonder why? (genuinely wondering. I’m a registered Republican- but prefer the “conservative” label.)
Comment by Jewels — 05.12.05 @ 8:32 pm
Why do you think they are trying to call themselves “Progressives?” They know the word “Liberal” is a bad thing so they need to soften it up a bit. But then again, they call ‘rape’ - ’sexual assault’, ‘illegal immigrants’ - ‘undocumented aliens’, etc. Are you surprised they want to soften liberal?
Comment by DoubleU — 05.12.05 @ 8:39 pm
The media matters piece is interesting.
Comment by DarkStar — 05.12.05 @ 9:08 pm
It goes without saying….
…..but requires constant reminders. The media is overwhelmingly liberal, and they see others through that lens. Thus, as Shawn puts itLast year I blo…
Trackback by Media Lies — 05.12.05 @ 9:38 pm
Disproving the myth that the “liberal media” (heh) liberally use “conservative” and rarely use “liberal”, linguist Geoff Nunberg does actual research to investigate, and totally debunks it:
http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2002/04/nunberg-g-04-22.html
and:
http://www.prospect.org/print/V13/8/nunberg-g.html
Respectfully,
Comment by Anomalocaris — 05.12.05 @ 11:14 pm
Thoughts
Matt Drudge IS mainstream media. His web site is mainly links to news articles. LaShawn Barber points out “liberal” media bias. Media matters disagrees. I happen to think that media matters makes some interesting points. The media IS biased,…
Trackback by Vision Circle — 05.13.05 @ 12:05 am
A liberal group (Soros-funded Media Matters) claiming that the liberal media isn’t liberal…….. hmmmmmmm…….
Comment by RedBeard — 05.13.05 @ 7:15 am
Yep, I knew that was coming.
So now I say, what about the information they present on this topic in particular?
Seriously.
I can point out biases of the media all day long. I can point out biases that, according to conservatives, shouldn’t happen because the media is “liberal”.
Comment by DarkStar — 05.13.05 @ 8:51 am
Liberals hate the word “Liberal”
La Shawn Barber explains, with charts even, how much Liberals hate being called Liberal. Interesting that we Conservatives don’t mind…
Trackback by JackLewis.net — 05.13.05 @ 3:33 pm
Personally, I don’t mind the bias and the prejudices of the mostly liberal media. What I mind is that they deny they have any bias! Like when Moyers had the chutzpah to complain that talk show host Hannity was conservative and actively and obviously pro-Bush, all the while denying that he and his show have any prejudice or bias.
As for Media Matters… they are a bit weak in the credibility department. I am sure the media does matter to George Soros… if he had to buy all the free propagand they spread for him, he may not be able to buy as many 527’s next election
Comment by SCSIwuzzy — 05.13.05 @ 4:04 pm
Anom,
How is that debunking? He complains that people disagree with him, casts some aspersions on them, and the points out how often liberal media is bandied about versus the term conservative media.
To totaly debunk something, one must dispute the data or the methods, neither of which is done in detail in your link.
Comment by SCSIwuzzy — 05.13.05 @ 4:13 pm
“A liberal group (Soros-funded Media Matters) claiming that the liberal media isn’t liberal…….. hmmmmmmm…….”
A conservative group (Richard Mellon Scaife- funded Media Research Center) claiming that the media are too liberal… hmmmmmmmmmm…
Comment by FunTed — 05.13.05 @ 4:23 pm
“When is the last time you heard Katie Couric…”
I honestly can’t remember. My TV is in the closet under some luggage.
I read blogs.
Comment by Richard — 05.13.05 @ 9:28 pm
As Christians, we should also embrace the term “fundamentalist.” It’s meant as a slur, but it really means that we believe in the fundamentals of the Bible and the Christian faith…C.S. Lewis’s Mere Christianity.
Yes, I’m a right-wing fundamentalist!
Also, our TV was kicked from the closet out of the house. We watch DVDs on the computer and read blogs and news online. We only miss it during big events like the superbowl and presidential elections, during which we invite ourselves over to friends’ house with offers to bring tons of food!
Comment by Elizabeth B — 05.14.05 @ 2:23 pm
Miriam Webster’s Dictionary:
LIBERAL:
Main Entry: [2]liberal
Function: noun
Date: 1820
: a person who is liberal: as a : one who is open-minded or not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional, or established forms or ways b : capitalized : a member or supporter of a liberal political party c : an advocate or adherent of liberalism especially in individual rights
CONSERVATIVE:
Main Entry: [2]conservative
Function: noun
Date: 1831
1 a : an adherent or advocate of political conservatism b : capitalized : a member or supporter of a conservative political party
2 a : one who adheres to traditional methods or views b : a cautious or discreet person
AND BONUS:
LIBERALISM:
Main Entry: lib·er·al·ism
Pronunciation: ‘li-b(&-)r&-”li-z&m
Function: noun
Date: 1819
1 : the quality or state of being liberal
2 a : often capitalized : a movement in modern Protestantism emphasizing intellectual liberty and the spiritual and ethical content of Christianity b : a theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom from restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard c : a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties d : capitalized : the principles and policies of a Liberal party
- lib·er·al·ist /-b(&-)r&-list/ noun or adjective
- lib·er·al·is·tic /”li-b(&-)r&-’lis-tik/ adjective
CONSERVATISM:
Main Entry: con·ser·va·tism
Pronunciation: k&n-’s&r-v&-”ti-z&m
Function: noun
Date: 1835
1 : capitalized a : the principles and policies of a Conservative party b : the Conservative party
2 a : disposition in politics to preserve what is established b : a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change
3 : the tendency to prefer an existing or traditional situation to change
Given the dictionary definitions, I as a conscious minority, understand that it took nearly two centuries to get civil rights on PAPER in this nation. I as a conscious minority, know which philosophy was more beneficial to seeing that long delayed JUSTICE come about. I as a conscious minority, know that there are people of certain philosophies eager to see those precious civil rights gains UNDONE, and seek a return to “tradional standards of treatment.”
Add that all up, and this conscious minority declares himself LIBERAL with pride, and will even wear the t-shirt if provided.
http://www.thecobraslair.com/images/GOP-CHESS.gif
-Cobra
Comment by Cobra — 05.14.05 @ 5:12 pm
I can say with absolute certainty, being one who would be labeled a conservative, that your conclusions about conservatives vis-a-vis race relations are completely wrong.
Dictionary definitions are not strictly applicable to the common usage of the words conservative and liberal in the political landscape of 2005. In 1776, I would have been considered a liberal, adhering to the Jeffersonian pledge, “I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” Today, with no change in philosophy, I’m a conservative. Today’s tyranny comes from the left, which has corrupted liberalism to the point that it is currently a well deserved pejorative term.
If you’re looking for those who judge people based upon race, look to those called liberals today. They are the ones who insist upon pigeonholing human beings, refusing to allow an America where people “will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”
Comment by RedBeard — 05.14.05 @ 7:32 pm
Redbeard: Indeed. While I am labled conservative, in traditional usage, I am quite liberal.
Comment by SCSIwuzzy — 05.14.05 @ 7:40 pm
Redbeard writes:
>>>If you’re looking for those who judge people based upon race, look to those called liberals today. They are the ones who insist upon pigeonholing human beings, refusing to allow an America where people “will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.â€
Your debate on this is not with me, Redbeard. It’s with American History and Current Society. The man who you paraphrase in your statement was NOT wiretapped, menaced, imprisoned and eventually murdered by “liberals.” Liberals didn’t fight against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Liberals didn’t fight against the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Liberals didn’t train firehoses and attack dogs on civil rights marchers. The man you idolize, Tommy Jefferson:
“I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. that is, every form EXCEPT for the SLAVES he owned (and reports say used sexually).
And as far as judging people by the content of their character, you need to review what some of your conservative friends are blogging about in regards to genetics…particularly INTELLIGENCE TESTING. This is not meant to indict all, based upon the actions of a few, but the evidence is clear about the true nature of many who call themselves “conservative.”
–Cobra
Comment by Cobra — 05.14.05 @ 11:41 pm
It really gets me. Listen to the hosts introduce their guests. The ones from left wing think tank are introduced as from think tank X; the ones from right wing thik tank are introduced as from conservative or right wing think tank X. The same when the guest is a columnist. Liberals are never tagged, conservatives always are.
Then look at the guest list. Liberals can appear all by themselves. Conservatives always have at least one liberal on the program as well to refute what the conservative has to say and the liberal usually is given more time.
Read the articles. If it is good for liberals, the main point is made in the first couple of paragraphs. If it is good for conservatives, the main point is in paragraph 16 or lower and under the fold and on an continued page.
Then we get the barefaced remark that the media is controlled by the religious right from the White House because the media is owned by the right wing. How they can say this with a straight face is totally beyond me.
Comment by dick — 05.14.05 @ 11:53 pm
Cobra, you show a disrespect for Thomas Jefferson that can only be explained by irrational and non-historical bias.
You seem to have a your lack of understanding that it was current liberal “heroes” like Robert Byrd (former KKK recruiter) who filibustered the Civil Rights Act, while conservatives like Everett Dirksen got it passed. Dirksen’s own words, quoting Victor Hugo, say it better than I can: “Stronger than all the armies is an idea whose time has come.” He also said, “The time has come for equality of opportunity in sharing in government, in education, and in employment. It will not be stayed or denied. It is here!” Does that sound like a conservative bigot to you? Does Robert Byrd, leader of the liberals in the Senate, seem like a swell fellow for filibustering against civil rights for 14 hours straight?
Your lumping of nut case bloggers in with true conservatives makes no sense whatever, unless your purpose is to provoke rather than discuss.
I guess my debate truly is not with you, Cobra, because it’s hard to debate you while you’re carrying around that log-sized chip on your shoulder.
Comment by RedBeard — 05.15.05 @ 9:50 am
Redbeard writes:
>>>”Cobra, you show a disrespect for Thomas Jefferson that can only be explained by irrational and non-historical bias.”
Not to hijack the thread on a Jefferson tangent, but exactly what am I supposed to “respect” about him?
From Sparks Notes:
>>>The defense of agrarianism was only one in a set of conspicuous social theories that Jefferson advanced in Notes. The most famous of these were his remarks on the relative characteristics of the black, native, and white populations in Virginia. While Jefferson believed the native and white populations to be intellectually comparable, he found blacks to be inferior to whites in the endowments of both body and mind. Although willing to grant certain cosmetic similarities between blacks and whites, he insisted on shortcomings of blacks with regard to beauty, imagination, and reason.
Jefferson viewed such inherent differences between blacks and whites as enough to make abolition impracticable. Although he supported, and even encouraged, the mixing of native and white blood, he viewed miscegenation between blacks and whites to be a crime against nature. For this reason, upon the inevitable step of emancipation, Jefferson could see no resort but to remove all blacks from the American continent, in a massive relocation project that would effectively repopulate the slave coast of Africa.”
http://www.sparknotes.com/biography/jefferson/section8.rhtml
Now as far as Robert Byrd goes…hey, he’s not my favorite guy. You fail to mention that RONALD REAGAN, Barry Goldwater, William Reinquist, and William F. Buckley also campaigned AGAINST the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Those four are the Mt. Rushmore of conservative thought in America today.
But you knew all that already, Redbeard, right?
–Cobra
Comment by Cobra — 05.15.05 @ 3:21 pm
[sigh]
Comment by RedBeard — 05.15.05 @ 4:58 pm
a short look at cobra’s art work tells you all you need to know about his opinions.
Comment by SCSIwuzzy — 05.15.05 @ 5:40 pm
“a short look at cobra’s art work tells you all you need to know about his opinions. ”
They are indeed consistently uncomfortable to wingers.
Comment by actus — 05.15.05 @ 9:04 pm
[Double sigh]
Comment by RedBeard — 05.16.05 @ 8:48 am
Well, Maplethorpe was uncomfortable too.
But if I ever wanted the “Illustrated Edition of Democratic Underground”, Cobra would get my vote. That is, if Ted Rall ever retired.
Comment by SCSIwuzzy — 05.16.05 @ 8:55 pm
SCSIwuzzy,
Thanks!
–Cobra
Comment by Cobra — 05.16.05 @ 9:05 pm
HEY! I’m a liberal! Boo! I live in San Francisco and I’m for gay marriage even though I’m hetero!
You know what else? I think liberals can be insufferable elitists. And it’s true, many think they know what’s best for everybody, I catch them in the act all the time. And the secular snobbish liberals are THE WORST! I was raised by secularists who just freak out at the word “Jesus”. (Other than that, mom and dad are great folks.)
Finally, if you don’t hate me yet here’s my kicker: I regularly read La Shawn Barber and agree with her much of the time! So THERE! HAHAHAHA!
(One more thing: like liberals, a lot of conservatives suffer from mindless groupthink. They’d have more credibility if one or two would break from the pack and disagree with their own kind more often.)
Let’s see…I disagreed with conservatives about Elian Gonzalez. I’m against any and all attempts Republicans come up with to gain the “black vote.” I’m solidly against Bush on his immigration non-policy. If you agree with me so much, perhaps you’re…just a little bit…conservative? - Admin
Comment by AF — 05.17.05 @ 11:47 pm
AF said, “They’d have more credibility if one or two would break from the pack and disagree with their own kind more often.”
With all due respect, if you really think that, you’re not reading the posts on this board. I can verify La Shawn’s independence, as stated above, and I have blasted administration policy on many an occasion, having clearly broken ranks with Mr. Bush on the illegal immigration mess, the bloated farm bill boondoggle, the horrible Bush/Kennedy [gag] education bill, and the pathetic campaign non-reform bill, just to name a few “tip of the iceberg” issues.
Conservatives are not synonymous with Republicans, nor even with each other. We enjoy a good family fight.
Comment by RedBeard — 05.18.05 @ 8:52 am
Could it be that Conservatives are mentioned more than Liberals because they are in power and therefore are in the news more often? Just a thought…
Comment by Rafael Daniel — 05.18.05 @ 12:49 pm
I don’t really think so, Rafael. I remember this disparity from long ago, when Dems controlled everything. It wasn’t really all that long ago, so no wisecracks about how old I am.
Comment by RedBeard — 05.18.05 @ 2:32 pm
We do? I guess I just didn’t get the memo, funny you got it, though.
I thought you said you were a moderate? - Admin
Comment by Non-Fat Latte Liberal — 05.26.05 @ 3:55 pm