Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
Media Matters’ inventory of 1,377 dailies — 96 percent of all there are, it says — led it to 201 syndicated columnists. And though it categorized 79 of them as “progressives,” 75 as “conservatives,” and 47 as “centrists,” it advised: “The truth is that conservatives have a clear and unmistakable advantage. Conservative columnists appear in more papers than progressive columnists do, and conservatives reach more readers.” Here are the numbers: 60 percent of the dailies publish more conservatives, 20 percent publish more progressives, and 20 percent strike an even balance. When columnists are multiplied by circulation to get an abstract figure that this survey calls the “total ideological circulation,” that TIC is 48 percent conservative, 38 percent progressive, and 16 percent centrist.
But still . . . Nat Hentoff, progressive? Hentoff actually rates a qualifying footnote that concedes “he holds conservative stands on a few issues, including abortion [but] he is progressive on most issues.” Steve Chapman, conservative? Actually, Chapman’s a libertarian, and — for whatever it signifies for his place on the ideological spectrum — as fierce a critic of the war in Iraq as you’ll find. Pat Buchanan, conservative? Well, he is, of course, but he despises the war too. Maureen Dowd, progressive? No, she’s snarky. She doesn’t care whose head she bites. Garrison Keillor, progressive? He’s a humorist, and I’m not sure humorists believe in progress. Do you think Keillor thinks Lake Wobegon has a prayer of becoming a place where the kids don’t grow up and leave? Hah — not even if Nissan builds a plant there. Bill O’Reilly, conservative? Try nitwit.
