REMINDER: Just 7% of Journalists Call Themselves Republican

The_Real_Fly's picture

In light of all the fake news and blatant media propaganda being published these days, I think it's important to remember how little diversity of opinions there are amongst our 'independent press'. A survey done in 2013 found that most shills hide under the cloak of 'independent', with about 30% calling themselves democrat. You can see how this trend has disjointed over the decades, with republicans being systematically removed from the sacred 5th estate.

With merely a handful of so called republicans in America's newsrooms, how can they honestly call themselves a 'free press', when in fact they're nothing more than democratic advocates shilling for their ideologies?

Incidentally, America's trust in their media has correlated very closely to the lack of political diversity in her newsrooms over the decades.

I suppose when you completely abandon principles for party, casting aside 50% of your viewer/reader base in the process, that's not exactly a sound business model for journalistic success -- judged by public opinion.

Then again, do they even care?
Content originally generated at

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Zorba's idea's picture

Journalist???? Where are they, who are they, the premise in the article's headline is clearly a False premise. These Legacy Liars are no more than paid chimps, in fact, apologies to the primates. These folks are mere whores. For fucks sake, its just a circus show.

moneybots's picture
"Just 7% of Journalists Call Themselves Republican"


Propagandists, not journalists. The media tells us what they want us to hear, not what actually is. I don't even watch the major network news anymore. It's all faux news.

The MSM colluded with the Hillary campaign, against Trump. That was interference in our election. The MSM has destroyed any trust in them. Yet they keep doubling down, from what i read about them.

The Russian election interference MSM propaganda campaign is rather tiresome at this point. It was the MSM that interfered in our election and they aren't going to convince me otherwise.


JailBanksters's picture

You can't be a Journalist when you take sides.

Which means CNN, FOX, MSNBC do not do any Journalism at all.

It's just Entertainment.

Jumbie's picture

True, just 7% of people willing and able to graduate with a journalism degree are Republican.

And note the shrinking % as Democrats.

In related news, just 1% of "journalists" are functionally illiterate - how are they supposed to relate to or represent that 40% of American consumers?


All in all, Demublican/Republicrat identification is dropping nicely.

techpriest's picture

Watch the career tracks of some of these journalists. Most are quite literally actors who will say anything for ratings.

TheABaum's picture

What exactly is a "journalist"?

A stenographer for the left.




rudyspeaks's picture

Again, bumpkin, the media is OWNED by 4 right-wing families (see below) and Comcast. They used to call Hugo Chavez a "dictator", just like, well, Faux News! (PS: Chavez won election after (internationally-supervised) election by huge margins)


moneybots's picture

Obama said he was going to fundamentally change America. Being elected has little to do with whether one is a dictator. Chavez did not abide by the political system that existed before he was elected. Chavez intended to be President for life. Maduro would see the Venezulan people starve to death, before he would give up power. Maduro does not abide by democracy. Neither does Obama abide by democracy. He is interfering with the currrent President.

Snípéir_Ag_Obair's picture

media is owned by Leftist Jews and you know it.

you just refuse to accept that the Left has ALWAYS been both statist and violent.

supporting illegal immigration, abortion, trannies in the girls locker room, lying about the MENA Wars... these are not conservative.

And whether or not liberal, it is Zionist Jews that, effectively, control the media, and only fools and liars would deny that.

kumquatsunite's picture

For those of you thinking Trump's wiretapping claim is brother (this was twenty years ago) bought his kid a "listening" toy; they took it away from him when they realized he could use it to hear conversations from hundreds of yards away. It may not be "wiretapping" as we think of it. The high tech devices are beyond what we can know and if you think Oboma doesn't know them all...

And as to the media, it should be of alarm that President Trump is being assailed on a daily basis by the Jewish owned media; see Hollywood where all the companies are known as Jewish or read any of the books on Hollywood that note their Jewish ownership. The whole thing is just bizarre.

And no former president, given all the Ultimate Inside Information they are given, should be allowed (as Obomao has done) to wage war against the current president. That is the ultimate in Treason.

rudyspeaks's picture

Hey Cum-quat! The biggest media outlet in America is Fox...owned by the Murdoch family. Jewish? It's 30-odd percent of ALL media, WHO is second, dumb-boy? The Luces! Also not Jewish. And Comcast is #5...this is too easy.

TGDavis's picture

I  believe Murdoch is Jewish.

TGDavis's picture

Couldn't believe it when I heard it. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but........

maxwellsdemon's picture

How is the weather in Tel Aviv Rudy?  Working on the next 911 false flag asshole?  The only two sites you can come up with are run by Jews too!! (The Luces sold their mags to Jews)  

The US media is Jewish run and in fact Comcast is run by Bryan Roberts who is described by the well known Jewish Forward media site as being unabadashly Jewish:

"A huge merger may turn the son of a Philadelphia Jewish entrepreneur into one of the most powerful Americans in the media industry.

Brian Roberts, 54, chairman and CEO of Comcast, a cable and broadband provider that announced on February 13 its intention to take over Time Warner Cable in a $45 billion deal, seeks to control the cable services of more than 32 million American homes, which would make him the unchallenged leader in the field.

The merger — which still needs congressional and regulatory approval — marks the latest step in the Roberts family’s long road from a modest start by his father and two Jewish partners in Tupelo, Miss. 50 years ago, to becoming America’s largest provider of home media content.

Roberts, a Maccabiah Games squash gold medalist known for his affinity for Israel, has not made his mark on Jewish life. But his Jewish identity, friends say, should not be doubted.

“Brian’s commitment to religion and Jewish causes is like every other thing he does: It is extremely personal and low-profile,” Ed Rendell, the former Pennsylvania governor, told the Forward. Roberts, he added, “does not carry these things on his chest.”

But it is part of his company’s DNA. Comcast was established in 1969 by Roberts’s father Ralph and his two Jewish partners, Daniel Aaron and Julian Brodsky. During a poker game, Ralph Roberts had heard about a small cable company in Tupelo looking for investors and the three partners decided to step in.

Aaron’s family had escaped growing anti-Semitism in Nazi Germany and arrived in New York in 1937. Both his parents committed suicide shortly after and Aaron and his brother were placed in foster families by a Jewish relief agency. Years later, Aaron said that his life was lived in the “shadow of the Holocaust.” When Brian Roberts joined the family company, Aaron was his first boss. “He had the greatest heart and social conscience,” Roberts recalled when discussing his involvement with Steven Spielberg’s Shoah Foundation. Aaron died in 2003 from Parkinson’s disease.

Brodsky, the third founder of Comcast, stayed with the company until his retirement in 2011. He served as vice chairman and is credited with pushing Comcast into the internet business, but when it came time to pass the business on to the next generation, Ralph Roberts, who by then owned a larger share of the company, brought in his son to take over. Brodsky and his wife Lois run a $10 million family foundation that supports many communal and progressive causes, including Jewish services and organizations.

Read more:



Murdoch is 100% Jewish by birth and has always been an outspoken Zionist:


"Rupert Murdoch is under fire for a tweet he posted. He apologized Sunday for criticizing coverage of the ongoing conflict in Gaza by what he described as the "Jewish owned press".

Now hold on for just a second. Before you think Murdoch is standing up to the Zionists and denouncing the fact that Jews control the media, think again. He is not doing that. He is actually LAMENTING over what he described as the "Jewish controlled press" not being pro-Israel enough with their reporting of the ongoing conflict in Gaza!!!!! In doing so, he also admits that the Jews control the media!!!! (Surprise, surprise )

What's funny is that some media sources like this article from Yahoo I have here seem to be trying to paint him as anti-Semitic. Although we know he's a HUGE Zionist stooge."


Murdoch's mom is Jewish:

Christopher Bollyn is an investigative journalist who has written extensively on the events of September 11, 2001 in the Washington-based American Free Press. He has researched different aspects of the 9/11 attacks and uncovered facts and evidence that challenge the official version of events. tried to smear Bollyn as an “anti-Semite” in order to discredit him and diminish the significance of his work. At the helm of both organizations, the ADL and Fox News, is an Australian-born Zionist named Keith Rupert Murdoch.

Murdoch’s Jewish Roots Murdoch “became an American citizen for business reasons,” according to Richard H. Curtiss, editor of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. Keith Rupert was born in Melbourne, Australia, on March 11, 1931. “Rupert’s father, Sir Keith Murdoch, was a newspaper publisher, and his mother an Orthodox Jew,” Curtiss wrote, “although Murdoch never offers that information in his biographies.” Murdoch’s father married Elisabeth Joy Greene, daughter of Rupert Greene in 1928. They had one son, Keith Rupert and three daughters. Later in life, Keith Rupert chose to use Rupert, the first name of his Jewish maternal grandfather. The young Keith Rupert was educated at Australia’s fashionable Geelong private school, and went on to the elitist and aristocratic Oxford University in England, according to Candour (UK) magazine. “Rupert’s father Sir Keith Murdoch attained his prominent position in Australian society through a fortuitous marriage to the daughter of a wealthy Jewish family, née Elisabeth Joy Greene. Through his wife’s connections, Keith Murdoch was subsequently promoted from reporter to chairman of the British-owned newspaper where he worked. There was enough money to buy himself a knighthood of the British realm, two newspapers in Adelaide, South Australia, and a radio station in a faraway mining town,” Candour wrote in 1984. “For some reason, Murdoch has always tried to hide the fact that his pious mother brought him up as a Jew.” While Murdoch may have “tried to hide” his Jewish roots, he has been quite forthright about his support for extreme right-wing Zionists, such as Benjamin Netanyahu and Ariel Sharon. Netanyahu, who wrote a book entitled The War on Terror: How the West Can Win in 1986, is a frequent commentator on Murdoch’s Fox News. Murdoch’s support for Zionism extremists is well known and a matter of record. As New York Governor George Pataki said, “There is no newspaper in the U.S. more supportive of Israel than the [Murdoch’s] New York Post.”



adr's picture

So Communist makes up 93%.

Sounds about right.

rudyspeaks's picture

The old brain-dead whine of the right. The "liberal media"...which, in the the run-up to the attack on Iraq, presented you w/4 LIARS (Cheney, Bush, Rice, Wolfowitz, etc) for every 1 person telling the truth! How "liberal"! When "W" would say (as he did several times) that the war was necessary because "Saddam would not let the weapons inspectors in", not ONE FU--ING deadbeat "liberal" did his/her job by simply pointing out that that statement is a LIE! Further, who is so shallow as to equate being a "democrat" with being a "liberal"? Is California Senator Feinstein a "liberal" She endorsed every war, Patriot Act (& renewals), the shivving of ACORN, Powell's ridiculous, now shameful, act at the UN. How "liberal"! But, above all, let me clue you how life works, bumpkins. What matters is, who OWNS the media...which is 4 right wing families (Murdochs, Luces, Disneys and Redstones) plus Comcast. A rich man in L.A. who likes to ski has a limo. His driver is an avid big wave surfer. A storm rolls into southern Cal. Where, my little friends, will the limo end up, Sun Valley or Ventura county line?'re welcome

Snípéir_Ag_Obair's picture



if you dont think liberals loooove war, you should expand your reading list.

Start with Samantha Power and R2P, then look up whether ANY dem pres ever started a war - are you prepared to claim there's never been a 'liberal' Dem president because Dems have always been warmongers, too?

When you define all that is good as 'liberal' and all that is bad 'right wing' you are engaging in sophomoric propaganda- not argument.

rudyspeaks's picture

Evidently you missed the "Bernie Rebellion". Not a surprise since, as an ACTUAL liberal (or, the closest to it you'll see in US politics) the "liberal media"(HAH!) ignored, marginalized and slandered him throughout the primaries. Did you miss the Wikileaks revelations? The DNC's mea culpas? Why would a "Liberal Media" treat him as they OBVIOUSLY did? WTF do people like you read (OK, that "reading" thing is sooo what do you, um, "pay attention" to?). When the MSM labels someone...say, Samantha War-criminal a liberal, do you just abandon rationality and accept the ARE familiar with "rational thought"??? Obama and HRC are toadies for Wall Street. Real leftists always hated Obama (he was NEVER a "community organizer"...he was an old-fashioned "Block-Buster"). "Liberal" has degenerated into an epithet for the half of the Duopoly that you don't like. Again, My original comment, below, got several down votes but no one, yourself included, has refuted any particular! 95% of everything you hear, read, or see has come through 6 companies owned by 5 (CBS and Viacom are both owned by thr Redstones) media companies whose track record for simple accuracy is pathetic. Rather than label "anyone I don't like" as a non-liberal, I prefer to ask, WTF IS a liberal and is this (say, HRC) really one? Or just what concentrated wealth wants me to THINK is one. Break free, my friend. Learn to think rationally, not just spew labels (the rest of your simple-minded anti-Semitic comments aren't worth addressing).

Ryan Langemeyer's picture

Hey Rudy.... that was great! Break up the Big 5 and start over with laws that used to be in place until ...... Clinton (?); so called Liberal. I think he broke the back of limits on ownership of media. May have been Bush II, but results are the same. Propaganda 24/7! 1984 is finally here.

DieSocialJusticeWankers's picture

Their profession is dead...murdered by the people that called themselves journalists...there are no doesn't exist anymore as a profession.

techpriest's picture

It's not dead. It just moved to a different location - out on the Internet.

esum's picture


nothing more than glorified welfare...

shimmy's picture

Bullshit on 50% claiming to be independents as so many are blatant democrat apologists. I guess claiming to be an independent is the new way to claim you are a democrat, kind of like the climate freaks saying climate change now instead of global warming since the global warming line doesn't work like it used to for them.

Now it is possible many just push the proganda from their employer's higher ups and they don't agree with it but I think if that were the case that we'd see a lot more people quitting and talking about the bullshit in that industry.

Playtime's Over's picture

They just won't give up on the polls, will they.  You can put that poll in a bag with some dicks and eat them. 

Rubicon76's picture

I call fewer than 7% of "journalists" journalists.

Oldwood's picture

They are creative writing lobbyists, shilling for their cause while also acquiring some fame and maybe for a few, a fortune. Amazing how Trump can be beaten over the head for his "financial conflicts" while some of these hacks have multi-million dollar contracts to do political assassination, while claiming simultaneous neutrality. Let us witness their paths of destruction and decide how neutral they really are.

Synoia's picture

Very true. They are employees and write what they must to keep their jobs.

Republican, Democrat of Communist, they need their income and their position is defined by their employer.

Generally a lage media concolmerate with an agenda which is nowhere near any position which helpps individual people in the US.

gmak's picture

MOst say independent. But what difference does it make at this point anyway? It doesn't matter what they say, it's what they do! (Actions speak louder than words).

TeethVillage88s's picture

Well everything in Washington is a Dog and pony Show for the Cameras.

There are serious issues being covered up by both sides in the Economics, Jobs, Growing Wealth Gaps in Wages & Wealth. Status Quo is what we get with a little more deregulation in each new administration.

I have a comment link (It almost looks like an article)

and here is one on Davide Rockefeller

techpriest's picture

a little more deregulation... I suppose the CFR gets a little smaller each year? Or that the average guy fills out less paperwork for semi-routine tasks like a major purchase or filing taxes each year?

Or does the deregulation only apply to some but not others?