The book, "What Liberal Media?," by Eric Alterman www.whatliberalmedia.com , details the concerted effort of right wing support groups and think tanks to move the national dialogue to the right, after losing the supreme court nomination of Judge Bork.
It has not been a vague desire to move the national dialogue-- it has been systematic and relentless. Right wing foundations funding various methods of moving our discussions-- from rapid fire talking point distribution to conservative politicians and media stars, to media ownership, to cultivating religious conservatives.
One of the most prevalent techniques has been "working the refs"-- accuse the media of being liberal so that to prove themselves to be "balanced" they'll move to the right. That technique has been so successful that some conservatives still accuse the media of being liberal. Many have made objective reporting of atrocities or any news that reflects badly on the USA seem liberal.
Like the poster says, even though we and millions of others around the globe were correct in opposing the US war ON Iraq, the country zoomed ahead into its devastating Shock & Awe, with banner headlines and glorification on most of the TV news. That is not a liberal press. That is wholly-owned subsidiaries of right wing conglomerates.
I remember our so-called liberal media hounding Democratic President Jimmy Carter with 90-pt type on newspaper front pages for every day that our hostages remained in captivity-- 172 days, 173 days, etc. But funny how all of them didn't bother posting the numbers for our "number one enemy" OBL remaining at large during the Republican regime of Bush and Cheney. Even though W bragged about getting him "dead or alive."
A "liberal mass media" would have called for the impeachment of the Bush Cheney regime numerous times-- once we found there were no WMD, once Abu Ghraib abuses came to light, once some of the abundant war profiteering of Halliburton and their ilk was discovered.
We have liberal alternative media but our TV and most radio news media which a lot of stressed out hard working people get their news from, are dominated by right wing or center-right views, with a couple of liberal shows tossed into the 80/20 mix for "balance." I'm just glad the younger generations get more news from the alternative media these days. Thank goodness.
I'm very glad we have the alternative media but feel so sad that most TV news chatter has gone so far to the right. Conservatives recognized that seeing raw footage from Vietnam influenced more people to oppose the war, so they increased their control of major broadcast networks and managed war time news more "effectively" for their goals, glorifying the USA's weaponry and strength. They recognized that the draft also increased opposition to the war so they began a reckless privatization of military support services that has cost us far more (in terms of national reputation and funding) than doing those services in house-- the latest example being the contractors hired to protect the Kabul embassy, when Marines used to do that job very well.
For an interesting look into professional right wing PR, "Blinded by the Right," by David Brock, takes you inside the Clinton years, when Republicans also worked overtime to smear him. Brock was a paid right wing propagandist who describes the various campaigns at work to destroy the Clinton administration. A good DVD on this subject is "The Hunting of the President/ The Ten Year Campaign to Destroy Bill Clinton."
http://www.thehuntingofthepresident.com/ .
Having seen the professional teams at work smearing Bill Clinton, one would think more famous journalists and star reporters would be exposing the professional right wing groups stirring up fear and hatred to get seniors to storm town halls to oppose government healthcare, even as Medicare recipients. Yet most popular broadcast news sources are reporting the fear of reform as "genuine grass roots" sentiment, pretending it is more widespread than it really is.