I thought the Fox reporter in John’s video acquitted himself pretty well (as did the Democratic committee) and, in fact, there is no reason to assume the guy is a conservative hack, even if he willfully turns a blind eye to the fact that his reportage is used for hack conservative purposes. A lot of the best reporting in Rochester comes from a tv station that is owned by Clear Channel. But I doubt many of these reporters — or many of the lower level Fox reporters — would describe themselves as conservative. Very few journalists of any kind do. And that is why the notion of better conservative journalism, which ED discusses at length, is something that is purely theoretical.
Not only are there no decent sources of straightish news that identify as conservatives, but look at any of the better-respected conservative commentators (Bobo, Sully, Chunky Bobo, etc.) and you’ll find that the arguments are generally based on C.S. Lewis or Burke or Hayek or some other dead non-journalist. Very little is based on anything that originates from contemporary reporting (no, right-wing think tank propaganda doesn’t count).
Conservatives are not interested in conventional, fact-based journalism. They’re interested in what they think of as principles.
Conventional, fact-based reporting is a liberal activity, just as teaching, academic research, social work, public defense, and public broadcasting are liberal activities. Can we just accept that once and for all and move on?