Two arguments in particular. Firstly:

Moreover, if institutional bias is a problem for American society, then why haven’t conservatives tried to solve it by building alternative unbiased institutions? The obvious societal corrective for bias at the Times and the Post and other outlets would be starting publications with a real claim to neutrality. Instead, conservatives have founded a constellation of explicitly partisan outlets ranging from National Review to the Gateway Pundit. The obvious societal corrective for bias at CNN and the major networks would be a truly objective news channel. Instead, we have Fox News. The obvious corrective for bias, indoctrination, and intolerance at our universities would be supporting and sending young people to colleges that strenuously avoid endorsing particular viewpoints. Instead, conservatives give money and often send their kids to explicitly conservative institutions such as Hillsdale, Liberty, Bob Jones, and dozens of other colleges that, mysteriously, never seem to come up in screeds about political correctness and the need to expose students to ideas they disagree with.

We’ll concentrate on being left-wing, you concentrate on being neutral. Sure. Maybe if it wasn’t a Sisyphean task. Recall John O’Sullivan’s first law of politics: “All organizations that are not actually right-wing will over time become left-wing.” That’s because the left thrives in cultural and educational institutions and will be taking them over and moving them to the left as fast as the right can set up the new neutral ones.


If we really ought to be troubled that there aren’t enough neutral purveyors of information in American society, the conservative efforts to address the issue amount, plainly, to moral failure. The notion that liberals should welcome Kevin Williamson into the fold without complaint even as the publication he’s left, to my knowledge, employs not a single liberal or leftist on its staff for regular commentary is laughable. Until the Daily Caller hires a full-time writer who regularly makes the case for taking Marx and microaggressions seriously, the right’s complaints on this subject should be dismissed out of hand and without regret. If that puts those in liberal media out of touch with the right in America, so be it. That would leave us, anyway, a step above Williamson and his anti-Trump defenders—themselves out of touch with the entirety of the left, the vast majority on the right and, of course, reality.

“National Review” and “The Daily Caller” are magazines of conservative opinion, not news. This is why they don’t have leftists as staff and contributors. This is also why no one on the right complains that “New Republic”, “The Nation” or “The Daily Kos” have no conservative writers. But the right does complain when the supposedly impartial mainstream news media leans so heavily to the left its head touches the floor. “The New York Times”, “The Washington Posts” and CNNs of this world need to make up their mind whether they want to be the unbiased sources of information and the forums where different viewpoints get a fair hearing, which they claim they are, or whether they want to finally come out as liberal and proud, which they really are. Either course has its consequences.