Confession by Implication

“In Writing ‘Obama Loses the Media,’ Politico’s Byers Admits Establishment Press Pro-Obama Bias Until Now,” Tom Blumer writes at Newsbusters:

Thanks, Dylan Byers. You’ve done those who recognize liberal establishment press bias as an irrefutable reality a big favor.

The Politico media reporter’s lengthy excerpt from a longer column — I’d call it a “tease,” but it’s 14 paragraphs — is entitled “Obama Loses the Media.” That means Obama has had ’em in his pocket until now. The rumors of permanent loss are likely exaggerated. Several paragraphs from from the lengthy excerpt and the column itself follow the jump.

Read on for long excerpts from Byers’ column and further thoughts from Blumer, then click over to Ace, the source of the above headline, for these observations from a commenter:

…note the parallels that Dylan Byers tries to draw between Bush’s loss of credibility in his second term and Obama’s. Now what do you notice? With Bush all he can do is refer to conservative media outlets like National Review that became disenchanted with him, i.e. explicitly partisan groups who turned on GWB. And what is that used as a contrast to? The mainstream media’s newly tough reporting on Barack Obama.

Byers HAS to understand the disconnect here, but he obvously can’t bring himself to point it out explicitly. It’s right there in the article, though: a tacit admission that the MSM’s relationship to a liberal Democratic president is the perfect analog to the explicitly conservative media’s relationship with a Republican one.

* * * * * *

I know nobody wants to click on a link that leads to POLITICO, but seriously, just go here and scroll to the bottom of page 1, beginning with the paragraph that starts “If you feel like you’ve seen this movie before.”

It’s hilarious, because the Bush examples are all about conservative opinion writers losing faith in GWB (Byers can’t find one example of a previously friendly MSM voice becoming critical), but the Obama examples are of neutral journalists, White House reports, diplomatic experts, etc. turning on him. The transparent implication is that Obama’s natural consituency is the mainstream media, just as Bush’s was right-wing pundits.

Obviously no surprise to anyone posting around here, but still one heck of an unwitting admission by POLITICO.

Related: “‘Well clowned’: ‘Maddow’ producer can’t tell difference between pundits and reporters,” as spotted by Twitchy.

Plus “Jumping Off the O-Bandwagon,” from Steve Hayward of Power Line: “I know, I know, if Ruth Marcus is the answer, the question has to be pretty silly.  But still. . .”