I am baffled about journalists. The question for
me is not why are journalists so overwhelmingly Lefties unable to view
the world with open eyes. They are almost a doppelganger for academics.
My question is "Who decides to become a journalist?"
Academics are predominantly people who were rewarded as children for succeeding in the classroom and failures at human relations on the playground. That I know.
Therefore, I would guess that journalists are a subset of academics who
did well in writing, possibly loved sports (as observers), were not the
top in their class but were also failures on the playground.
My sample is small but my source is the best: Robert Novak who was the top insider journalist for forty years in Washington. (Prince of Darkness) He found that the journalists he knew reported positively on politicians who coddled them and until the 1990s drank booze with them regularly. Journalists seemed to want to be friends with the people they reported on regularly, more than anything. Journalists only focused on the immediate moment and being in good graces with the people who liked them or pretended to like them.
Sounds like the childhood playground to me. Sounds like journalists were failures in ordinary human relations just like academics.