The 25 Most Influential Liberals In The US Media

Forbes has posted a listing of  The 25 Most Influential Liberals In The U.S. Media. As Libby writes, “I don’t think Forbes quite understands what Liberal means.” Their definition is somewhat odd:

Broadly, a “liberal’ subscribes to some or all of the following: progressive income taxation; universal health care of some kind; opposition to the war in Iraq, and a certain queasiness about the war on terror; an instinctive preference for international diplomacy; the right to gay marriage; a woman’s right to an abortion; environmentalism in some Kyoto Protocol-friendly form; and a rejection of the McCain-Palin ticket.

Considering that even some conservatives agree with some of these positions this definition leads to the inclusion of people that many would not consider to be liberals at all, such as Fred Hiatt and Andrew Sullivan. The relative influence of those on the list can also be argued with. Blog readers might still find the article worth glancing at, primarily as bloggers fill many of the spots. This does provide a good example of the degree to which the line between bloggers and the media is now as murky as the line between liberals and conservatives.

1 Comment

  1. 1
    Jim Z. says:

    The list is quirky.

    About a third are legitimate – they are both liberal and influential (Krugman, Huffington, Klein, etc.).

    Another third are at best middle of the roaders, moderates, that Forbes is cleverly trying to define as “liberal” in order to continue to shift the political ground (Zakaria, Friedman).

    A final third is just laughable (the news head of the WSJ, Wash. Post and NYTimes editorial heads? – give me a break!).

1 Trackbacks

Leave a comment