Bias? We Don't See No Stinkin' Bias

Hugh has a great post on the CBS whitewash of Rathergate. Hugh concludes (prior to the first two of no doubt numerous updates-to-be):

The report ends with this absurd conclusion:

"Inevitably, some inside and outside CBS News will fault a few, if not many, of the Panel's findings and conclusions. We will have been too tough, too easy, intrusive, timid, unfair, naïve, gullible or more. This is not a simple story, but we are confident that we have told it fully and fairly."

"Too tough?" With a punt on the central question of the controversy? CBS got what it wanted --a slap on the wrist, an apparent wrap-up with the dismissal of some underlings. The culture of undisclosed bias gets a pass, and the obvious corruption of the "news" process in the service of the Democratic Party is classified as "unknowable" because Dan Rather and Mary Mapes said they weren't partisans? What a joke, as transparent a whitewash as the documents were forgeries.

Did we really expect anything different? When institutions investigate themselves, they rarely deliver anything credible -- especially IIDs ("institutions in denial") like MSM.

A quick perusal of this blog's list of media bias evident in MSM election coverage will refresh your memory of just how pervasive the bias is -- if you can stand refreshment.