Still, there was a period, well before the Reagan Revolution, that could help inspire and guide today’s reform-minded conservatives. In its first few decades, National Review was roiled by internal debates that spilled onto its pages over the right course for conservatism. And now, after a quarter century of relative contentment with an ever more conservative Republican establishment, it seems that dissent is coming back into style on the right. Even to those conservatives who welcome this shift, it is small consolation for their electoral defeat. But at least their daily reading diet is about to become a lot more interesting.
Feature
08:00 AM - May 18, 2009
Heresy on the Right
A handful of new Web sites try to rewire conservative media
‘See you on the other side’ - Meet Jessica Lum, a terminally ill 25-year-old who chose to spend what little time she had practicing journalism
#Realtalk: This is the best moment to be in journalism - The old stuff isn’t coming back, but that’s okay
Streams of consciousness - Millennials expect a steady diet of quick-hit, social-media-mediated bits and bytes. What does that mean for journalism?
Sticking with the truth - How ‘balanced’ coverage helped sustain the bogus claim that childhood vaccines can cause autism
An ink-stained stretch - Can Aaron Kushner save the Orange County Register—and the newspaper industry?
This is the best moment to be in journalism (25)
The WSJ editorial page hits rock bottom (19)
Stop with the Jew-ranking already!
“There are some lists that have helped Jews in the past, including, most notably, Schindler’s, but…”
Please continue pronouncing ‘gif’ any way you please
We are all correct
The New York Times told me to take this down
“If you wouldn’t mind using another publication to advertise your infringement tool, we’d appreciate it”
In AP, Rosen investigations, government makes criminals of reporters
“[A]s flagrant an assault on civil liberties as anything done by George W. Bush’s administration”
CJR's Guide to Online News Startups
Uptown Messenger – Hyperlocal news for a neighborhood in New Orleans
Who Owns What
The Business of Digital Journalism
A report from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism
Questions and exercises for journalism students.
" . . . conservatives grew up . . . aspiring to be the next William F. Buckley Jr."
More of the current crop seem to have grown up aspiring to make as much money as George Will.
#1 Posted by penalcolony, CJR on Wed 3 Jun 2009 at 04:21 PM
Interesting piece and it's good to see somebody else noticing what a great journalist Tim Carney is becoming. That's why he was my first recruit to write a new column when I joined the Examiner as editorial page editor in 2006. I generally agree that the Right has failed to develop reportorial talent, but it's not for lack of trying with some of us. I joined the Heritage Foundation in 1999 to start the Database 101 Computer-Assisted Research and Reporting (CARR) program there and am still teaching its intro Excel course a decade later. We are seeing a growing number of conservative opinion writers and bloggers taking the course because they are beginning to recognize the value of having data analysis skills, which is a step in the right direction.
#2 Posted by Mark Tapscott, CJR on Wed 3 Jun 2009 at 04:39 PM
If there are enterprising Reporters and editors who actually wish to cover the Right, let me offer up my Blog, Valley of the Shadow (www.valley-of-the-shadow.blogspot.com) and a series of posts I am writing about rebuilding the party called "The Republican Encyclicals,"
Some of the stuff I learned when i was a democrat in NYC and others watching the Democrats over the past 8 years.
Through the Blog is my email address and I am available for interviews.
If you are interested in the two party system....
#3 Posted by JSF, CJR on Thu 4 Jun 2009 at 12:53 AM
As an addenda regarding "The Republican Encyclicals," I send out 5 a week through an email list where some major figures who I know (in DC and CA and Bloggers) read it.
Imagine a Right Wing JounoList based on these posts.
Reporters, editors, the ball is in your court....
#4 Posted by JSF, CJR on Thu 4 Jun 2009 at 12:56 AM
I'm sorry, but while this article notes some important things about the need for investigative journalism from the right, most of it was so facile in its analysis -- not to mention just plain wrong -- as to be laughable. It lost me right up top when it said "National Review, The Weekly Standard, and The American Spectator—the three most influential conservative print magazines (not counting more academic quarterlies such as Commentary and City Journal)—have consistently backed the policies of the Republican Party and its leaders in Congress and the White House, even when those leaders seemingly betrayed their principles."
That is such a ludicrous and easily disprovable statement as to be journalistic malpractice. The American Spectator in particular was out front in criticizing numerous aspects of the Bush administration. National Review Online featured an active debate on its site about Bush's spending and other matters. Meanwhile, the reference to "liberal treason" is just nuts. Sure, somewhere on the right somebody may have used that phrase, but to say that the right competed to see who could say "treason" or similar words the loudest is just a lie.
#5 Posted by Quin Hillyer, CJR on Thu 4 Jun 2009 at 08:08 AM
Ever heard of http://americanthinker.com/ http://michellemalkin.com/ http://patdollard.com/ & don't forget, a FReeper from http://FReeRepublic.com did the legwork on the falsified Bush AirForce memo?!?
I leave out numerous lesser known, yet just as critical bloggers where I get the vast majority of my news from.
Those harshly critical news sources are out there for those willing to move beyond those DC central publications that quite frankly strike me as to milquetoast in their general approach to the daily news cycle.
For the Right to soften their ideological stance while the Left more & more sounds like the monolithic wall of sound that daily emanated from Soviet era apparatchiks, is nothing short of political & national suicide.
Btw, what the Left is now engaged is traitorous & seditious activity as it continually works to subvert our Republic. Read- Cloward-Piven strategy.
#6 Posted by tahDeetz, CJR on Thu 4 Jun 2009 at 11:50 AM
That Quin Hillyer sure be (sic) a righteous dude.
http://spectator.org/archives/2006/11/06/republicans-will-hold-on
By Quin Hillyer on 11.6.06 @ 12:08AM
The American Spectator
"When Congress convenes in January of 2007, Republicans will be elected both as Speaker of the House and as Senate Majority Leader."
"The new Republican speaker, who will not be Dennis Hastert, will enjoy a margin of only one vote. But in the Senate, where Republicans currently control 55 of the 100 seats and where many pundits are now saying they teeter on the brink of losing their majority, the GOP instead will lose no more than two seats."
RESULT: You sure called that one right, Quin.
NOV. 7, 2006, 12 a.m.
U.S. Senate
Conservatives 55
Democrats 44
Independents 1
Difference: Conservatives +11
JAN. 1, 2007
U.S. Senate
Conservatives 49
Democrats 49
Independents 2
Difference: Conservatives -2
NOV. 7, 2006, 12 a.m.
U.S. House of Representatives
Conservatives 232
Democrats 202
Independents 1
Difference: Conservatives +30
JAN. 1, 2007
U.S. House of Representatives
Conservatives 202
Democrats 233
Independents 0
Difference: Conservatives -31
"And Mr. Conventional Wisdom, who is the lackey of the mainstream media and the supposedly nonpartisan election "experts," again will have enough egg on his face to make omelets that feed multitudes."
RESULT: Quin, if Mr. Conventional Wisdom was wearing the latest in poultry products on his face following the 2006 Congressional elections, what were the hottest fashions at the Spectator and the Washington Times?
"Let's examine the Senate first, because it is easier to understand. It boils down to this: Democrats are trying to seize seats from states that traditionally vote Republican. Even in a bad year for Republicans, it is difficult for Democrats to overcome the triple advantages of incumbency, superior fundraising, and a population that usually leans rightward. Not only that, but the national economy -- which, when it is strong, usually boosts incumbents tremendously -- is arguably the strongest in the entire history of the world. (More on that a bit later.)"
RESULT: Quin, ole chap, if “arguably the strongest (economy) in the entire history of the world,” circa November 2006, figured to carry incumbent Conservatives to victory on Election Day, does that mean that the rather putrid economy of November 2008 spelled the demise of Palin, McCain, etc.? Oh, meant to ask where you got your degree in economics: The Alan Greenspan School of Irrational Exuberance and Offshore Banking?
“On the presidential level, Virginia and Montana almost always vote Republican, Missouri and Ohio usually do, and Tennessee does so more often than not. Pennsylvania, a state that tends to lean only a little leftward, has not elected a Democrat in a regularly scheduled Senate election since the 1970s. And in Rhode Island, a very liberal state, Democrats must overcome a habit of supporting three different generations of the (liberal Republican) Chafee family for statewide office.”
RESULT: Virginia (Jim Webb), Montana (Jon Tester), Missouri (Claire McCaskill), Ohio (Sherrod Brown), Pennsylvania (Bob Casey, Jr.), and Rhode Island (Sheldon Whitehouse) all went to the Democrats. You, Quin ole’ sport, went 0-for-6. Sure hope it wasn’t your arbitration year.
“Meanwhile, Democrats this year are defending several seats of their own that, except for the national anti-Republican trend, feature unique circumstances that should make them nervous.
“Maryland has been trending a bit more conservative anyway, and this is the second straight election cycle where Maryland black leaders are expr
#7 Posted by Mark, CJR on Tue 9 Jun 2009 at 07:18 PM
Conservatives don’t actually value public affairs reporting because they think the correct government policies are always so obvious that only the witless, spineless and treasonous could oppose them. Therefore, the reporting of new details doesn’t really matter to them: Government spending and taxes must always be lower. Regulation of business should always be lightened. The military should always be bigger. Foreign policy should always be more confrontational. Social change is always lamented. I can easily imagine a “liberal’’ reporter discovering and reporting on a place where taxes are too high and regulation too heavy. I cannot imagine a conservative reporter discovering and reporting on a place where taxes are too low and regulation too light; he would have a cognitive breakdown if he tried. OK. I am oversimplifying. But my view explains why 1-there aren’t many respectable conservative reporters 2-conservatives so often vilify their opponents instead of debating them 3-so many conservatives can’t see the difference between the best newspapers in the country – such as The New York Times and the Washington Post – and the Soviet-era Pravda.
#8 Posted by Peng De Huai, CJR on Wed 10 Jun 2009 at 03:20 AM
Well this witless screed is just hilarious!
How come the Columbia Journalism Review doesn't change its name to something more benefiting its mission?
I mean consider calling yourselves Delusional Libtard Apologists Grasping For Straws...
#9 Posted by juandos, CJR on Sun 25 Oct 2009 at 02:10 AM