Definition of irony:
Journalists lamenting news coverage of Donald Trump’s self-promotional presidential campaign.
Representative sample, via the Boston Globe’s Jeff Jacoby.
News organizations are under no obligation to provide a platform to every narcissistic buffoon who declares himself a candidate for the White House. It’s probably futile to expect the networks hosting the Republican primary debates to exclude a ratings magnet like Trump, but they should. His presence on the stage will be degrading to everyone in the room. Even if the other contenders run rings around Trump on substance, his insults and idiocies will stain them all by association.
Do the GOP’s serious candidates really want to share the spotlight with a loudmouth who spent much of the last presidential election cycle trafficking in “birther” theories?
Then again, do serious journalists want to give the spotlight to a loudmouth who spent much of the last presidential election cycle trafficking in “birther” theories?
Ay, there’s the rub.
A suggestion for news outlets worldwide: Adopt the official Campaign Outsider Bill O’Really Policy™.
The hardworking staff once toiled at a local public broadcast station, and our single mandate to the newsroom was this: Nobody can mention Fox Newshound Bill O’Reilly unless 1) there is blood involved, or 2) he’s on a police blotter.
It worked great then. It could work even better now as the Donald Trumped-Up Policy (pat. pending).
Ask for it by name.
Campaign Outsider 
Are you suggesting that a local PBS station was putting its thumb on the scale?
And here, I thought, we were getting the most unbiased political reporting ever.
I guess it is like the Obama administration being the most open and transparent administration in history !
What I’m saying is this, Mudge: Bill O’Reilly’s on-air antics are not news, nor are they newsworthy. And that goes double for his off-air antics, with the possible exception of resume-inflating.
You’re not addressing the question that was asked, John.
Quite unlike you.
I am well aware of PBS’s disdain for O’Reilly and for news outlets on the right. But the question is whether or not there is a deliberate effort on their part to put their thumbs on the scale.
Deliberate effort, Mudge? Doubtful. But is there a reflexive bias against conservatives and conservative viewpoints in public broadcasting? That case you might be able to make. (Although NPR’s On the Media says NPR does not have a liberal bias. See here: http://goo.gl/QVMWgY)