The news media in general are liberals.
We're in a kind of vicious cycle where the media tell the politicians, and the politicians tell the people, that perception is reality, and the perception of saving dooms a politician. I don't believe perception is reality, or that all Americans think that.
What I've certainly learned is that whenever I've said anything about real politics, I've come under attack. So it's best simply to play politics on television.
The press don't wake up in the morning simply to be a mouthpiece for pols - they're out to uncover and expose news. That often is at odds with what politicians are setting out to do - it's both symbiotic and antagonistic. They need each other, they work in concert with one another, they work against one another.
It's hard to talk about politics in a Hollywood world.
The BBC is very aware of its role in shaping people's consciousness… it's manipulative and deeply political.
Television changed politics forever. If you’re not any good at it, forget it.
Since the rise of television in the 1950s, the media have become the central forum for American politicking, and increasingly today that role is being played by the blogosphere. With the blogger and the viewer replacing the pamphleteer and the parader, politicians focus on marketing themselves and their causes to passive consumers rather than mobilizing passionate soldiers. The new language of politics sounds like this: Spin doctors stage photo ops as pollsters survey voter preferences, spawning celebrity candidates.
The media doesn't understand conservatives at all.
The problem is that, you know, the corporate press loves [Donald Trump].
Every other network has given all their shows to liberals. We are the balance.
Right-wing media and politicians are looking for any opportunity to be critical of the reporters who are here. Some reporters make judgments, but that is not my style. I present both sides and report what I see with my own eyes.
As the age of television progresses, the Reagans will be the rule, not the exception. To be perfect for television is all a President has to be these days.
To be perfect for television is all a President has to be these days.
Ronald Reagan was then very successful in politics and a master of television.
I first came to think about media and politics in the late 1960s, having observed some distortions up close, but since then I wouldn't say that my personal experience has remained an important motive for my writing about media.
I don't think it's in any way harmful, this marriage of media and politicians. I think it enhances the communications process considerably and makes it possible for the public to be far more aware, far more up-to-date on issues and the opposite sides of the issues.
Politicians who complain about the media are like sailors who complain about the sea.
You know, the media and politicians are always gonna be in a bit of tension with one another and probably most of the time that's healthy and indeed even creative. But it's where - it's really when news organisations are used as kind of instruments of politics that it gets tricky.
The journalistic and political classes are very eager to borrow the cultural authority of comedians when it suits them, sending out gala invitations and posing for photos in hopes that a bit of that edgy satirical shine will rub off on them.
Roger Ailes's effect on politics was much longer-lasting than Richard Nixon's, even though Nixon was elected president twice.
In the press this week, NBC has been calling me every name in the book. In fact, they think I'm such an idiot they now want me to run the network.
His administration apparently means to define itself as a television program instead of a government...I don't know if it can please both its sponsors and its intended audience.
What about the accusation that Hollywood is trying to advance its liberal agenda? Well, the fact is, while the creative community admittedly leans left, Hollywood has become a corporate town.
Today, much of journalism and politics are in a kind of collusion to oversimplify and personalize issues. No room for ambivalence. Plenty of room for the personal attack.
But I think it's undeniable that the Times is a liberal paper.