The following evidence of liberal bias in the film critic community could be repeated until we ring in 2013.
For now, let’s just compare Time magazine film critic Richard Corliss’ hatchet job on the conservative documentary “2016: Obama’s America” with his take on far-left director Michael Moore’s “Capitalism: A Love Story.”
Corliss’s “2016” assault goes on so long you may need to rehydrate before you finish it. The review pulls out every stop to critique the film’s major and minor points and performs some typically deflective liberal dancing along the way. Here’s just one howler segment with my two cents added in:
Obama calls for a nuclear-free world, as Ronald Reagan often did (Reagan didn’t vastly reduce our warhead count as Obama has); he allows the national debt to rise, as Bush 43 did (Not to the insane levels that Obama has done which makes a world of difference)….
Nearly four years later, though, Obama has achieved virtually nothing that had not been proposed of enacted by Republican Presidents before him (cough, cough … ObamaCare?).
Now, here’s Corliss weighing in on “Capitalism: A Love Story,” Moore’s 2009 documentary he calls “broadly entertaining, ceaselessly provocative, wildly ambitious.”
Does Corliss lean on an outside source to debunk Moore’s claims as he did with “2016?” Nope. Does he take multiple arguments to task as he did with “2016?” No way.
None of this would matter if Corliss penned reviews for The Nation, The Huffington Post or Talking Points Memo. All those outlets are liberal in nature, and their critics should rightly reflect that point of view.
Corliss works for an allegedly neutral news outlet, yet his reviews are clearly left of center, and he doesn’t lift a finger to hide it. That puts him in good company, since the vast majority of MSM reporters these days do the very same thing to the news each day.