Who AreThey? Why Shouldn't We Know?

There has been a realization recently of a nefarious group called Journolist. Journolist is an invitation-only website where liberal issues are brought up, discussed, and shaped. From them, liberal policies and approaches to news stories and information filters are formulated. Apparently membership to Journolist consists mainly of Democrat political strategists along with journalists, from television, newspapers and the blogosphere. Have you ever wondered why the Democrats have been so consistent in covering only certain talking points on issues and avoiding other important issues over the last couple of years? Given the randomness of perspective that has always endured in the press, it has been a mystery why lately this untalked about lock step of thought and reason has manifested so pervasively. Now we know why. Part of the entry agreement into Journolist is the pledge to never discuss its existence to outsiders. The realization of this group is now coming to light. It would be very healthy for America if the membership of this exclusive club was known by all Americans.

Think about it. The advantages of a journalist being a member of Journolist are enormous. You get the inside scoop for your stories. The more you regurgitate the party line, the more you get to contribute to the give and take of the formulation of positions. In this day and age when major news media establishments are headed for bankruptcy, this is probably the most secure lifeline a journalist could ever have. Where old-school news people had to get out and dig to get on the inside for stories, the inside is automatically opened for you. And there is the oh so enticing seduction of insider power that comes with this package.

There is no equivalent group on the right. For many reasons that I hope to cover later, it just isn't in our DNA. Our form of the Journolist is talk radio; hardly exclusive, hardly private, exposed for all the world to hear and partake in.

Now, a group like the Journolist group is not illegal. This is America, after all. But what I would like to know is that when I see an ABC or CBS or NBC talking head delivering news stories, I want to know if he or she is a member. When I read a political story generated by a reporter from the New York Times, it is important to me to know if the author of the story belongs to Journolist. Further, it would be very important if we knew whether or not the source of the story that the author was relying on for information is a member of Journolist. That will obviously help us understand the believability of their perspective on the issues better when we read it.

If the disclosure became mandatory, then perhaps maybe some day, membership in Journolist and other secret political/media webs would rightfully become a blemish to a reporter rather than a secret asset. And journalism, as a profession would be healed of its tarnished image