The cover story of the New York Times Magazine this weekend is either called "The End of Republican America?" or "A Case of the Blues," depending on whether you look at the cover or the online version. The author, Benjamin Wallace-Wells, spent some time with NRCC chairman Tom Cole and catalogues the myriad, perhaps insuperable, challenges facing the House GOP as it tries not to win back seats lost in 2006, but stave off yet more losses this cycle.

It's certainly a legitimate article, if not exactly a groundbreaking one, and I have no particular complaints about it. But I did find myself wondering: Couldn't they have found a reporter from a conservative magazine to write this story?

In his day job, Wallace-Wells writes for Rolling Stone (as Ben, actually) where the tone of coverage is anything but sympathetic to Republicans. Before that he wrote for the left-leaning Washington Monthly.

So, to answer the question above: Yes, they probably could have. Not that anyone would expect it. Nor does the Times Magazine have a graduate of National Review writing about the Democrats. That's Matt Bai, and his previous job was -- perhaps coincidentally, perhaps not so much -- Rolling Stone.

And it's not just the Times Magazine; there is in fact a dearth experienced feature reporters who write for mainstream magazines and newspapers. The mastheads of Time and Newsweek are filled with reporters who graduated from left-aligned publications. The New Republic is another example, but the Washington Monthly may have no rival as a journalist factory. Among the many former staffers who populate the list of Contributing Editors, here are just the ones I know currently write for major newspapers or magazines:

            Jonathan Alter

Katherine Boo

Matthew Cooper

Michelle Cottle

James Fallows

           
Joshua Green

           
Michael Kinsley

           
Nicholas Lemann

Jon Meacham

           
Timothy Noah

           
Joseph Nocera

           
David Segal

           
Walter Shapiro

           
Amy Sullivan

           
Nicholas Thompson

           
Steven Waldman

           
Wallace-Wells

           
Robert Worth

I didn't even include Joshua Micah Marshall, who has set up a viable and valuable media company of his own. (Full disclosure: I once wrote an article for the Monthly; Sullivan was my editor and made it a much better piece.)

Conservatives grouse that the writers and editors at the national magazines lean left, and there is definitely some truth to that. Not to a man and woman, and this does not mean their reporting follows the Democratic Party line, but it does have consequences on which stories are covered and how they are covered. But I think the lessons are wrong.

The reaction is usually to set up an alternative forum which is defined as being explicitly conservative. The problem is that these alternative organizations often operate inside a bubble which their "liberal" counterparts do not. This can be the case beyond journalism as well. On the web we can see this very clearly: The non-partisan but in some ways "liberal" Wikipedia has been answered by the conservative, low-quality Conservapedia.

You could see this in journalism when, last month, new Washington Times editor John Solomon brought the newspaper's style book closer in line with the standards at every other daily broadsheet in America. Some on the right yelped that this was giving in to the "reigning liberal sensibilities." But this gets it exactly backwards: instead of "liberal" coming to mean "neutral," these conservatives are letting "neutral" come to mean "liberal."

For the record, among the "liberal" sensibilities to which Solomon's paper succumbed: calling Hillary Clinton "Clinton" rather than the more personal "Hillary" and referring to "illegal immigrants" instead of the antagonistic "illegal immigrants."

The liberal tilt of mainstream newspapers and magazines certainly has something to do with the professional networks which find writers for their stories. But it also has something to do with conservative journalists rarely operating outside their zone of comfort. And especially in magazine articles, they tend to add commentary to existing stories rather than going out and finding new ones.

This is how it works: Liberals get reporting jobs. Conservatives get opinion columns. Look at the Newsweek masthead, liberal Jonathan Alter does indeed have an opinion column, but his full title is Senior Editor and Columnist. George Will is just Columnist. The columnist can make overt arguments the way a reporter cannot, but the columnist's words are also unmistakably opinions. But decisions that go into how a story is reported are the product of a reporters' opinions. These biases are not always obvious. (And it bears repeating, there are many other biases besides political outlook in play.)

Conservatives' railing against the New York Times for being liberal has some salutary effects, and certainly creates some new jobs. A few years ago, Bill Kristol admitted this was "working the refs" (not his phrase). And look: today Kristol himself is a New York Times columnist.

Up to a point, there is a structural bias to the newspaper industry. This can be summed upin three words: "Woodward and Bernstein." Oftentimes journalists look for something that needs to be fixed by the government. Right-minded individuals, to use an intentionally tendentious phrasing, do not clamor to fix every last societal ill. But then, why doesn't the right of center dominate investigations into the abuse of government powers? Surely this has a lot to do with Republicans holding a lot of government power for a long time. But then Reason magazine, which is certainly right of center on economic issues, is mostly a lifestyle magazine. It's Slate for libertarians, with a print edition.

One exception that comes to mind is Byron York. He is not the only reporter at National Review, but he is the only one whose articles include a dateline. His 2005 book "The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy" was a detailed look at how the left has set up its own alternative apparatii in response to conservative ones. Nothing against Wallace-Wells, but York too would have been an excellent choice to write a story about the NRCC's misfortunes.

Which raises a question conservatives should be asking themselves: If the left builds itself a successful activist structure mirroring that of the right (and to a large extent, they already have) while maintaining a soft grip on ostensibly non-aligned political media institutions, what kind of position will the conservative movement be in then?

When one says "conservative journalist," too often this means "columnist," not "reporter." If the right can fix this, they've got a chance.

Cross-posted from Blog P.I.

If you haven’t read Eric Odom’s post about being an A-List blogger, I urge you to. The message is not only spot on, but well worth sharing with anyone who blogs, regardless of what successes they might currently be enjoying.

His post serves as not only a reminder, but a well-needed shot in the arm.

As the modern media contact for the NRCC, I work with bloggers and campaigns daily - many of which ask for advice and guidance.

Lately, a few of them have written me and expressed their frustration; wondering whether or not their blog was actually making an impact. They seemed disheartened by their low readership. They have since each received Odom’s post.

My favorite line:

“A growing readership is important, and something every blogger should be mindful of. But more importantly, it’s the who, not the how many.”

The “who” is exactly why a blog like “Stay Red Kansas”, which holds Nancy Boyda accountable, is making waves in KS-02. A few months back, “Stay Red” posted this, after being tipped off that Nancy Boyda
walked out during General Keane’s “positive” assessment of Iraq.

That post led to this, this, and this – just to name a few.

Who’s making a difference now?

Regardless of whether you have 40 readers or 4,000, Odom is right, “an effective blog is one that is driven by passion, honesty, and a blogger who isn’t afraid to link to a few other bloggers.”

Sure, you might not see more than 40 visits a day for the first year, but those 40 visits may be the most important visits you’ll ever have.

I tip my hat to Odom for his post. As long as we continue to roll up our sleeves, we’ll continue to blaze the trail needed to earn back the majority.

I’m all in favor of candidates and the Republican Party collecting as many e-mail addresses from supporters as they can. Despite the rise of social networks e-mail is still the most powerful tool for connecting with online supporters. Ask the Obama campaign how e-mail is treating them.

Candidates and parties use gimmicks to get e-mail addresses. Sen. John McCain has an earmark petition
on his site. Another technique is the survey. I received an e-mail from the National Republican Congressional Committee asking to fill out a survey. They claim my opinion will “help [them] regain the majority in 2008.”

The questions are the same loaded ones I’ve gotten for years by snail mail from conservative/Republican groups asking for money. At least in the NRCC’s case they only want my e-mail address and zip code. No donate button in visual range.

Commenters at Michelle Malkin’s weblog noticed this too. Walterc wrote:

What a slanted questionnaire. I was expecting something a little less self serving that would actually get some valuable feedback from the constituancy (sic).

This was just asking me to sign off on their campaign rhetoric.

Pabarge is even more cynical:

I’m sorry but this survey is complete spin and a shill for donations. None of these people intend to follow through on the Republican agenda. They know our hot buttons and they’ll push those buttons when they want money, but once they get re-elected they’ll stab their very own published agenda in the back.

This survey does not even provide a place to give these RNCC mutts a piece of our minds.

Sad.

I give no $$ to the RNCC until I see some sign of real change.

I don’t blame them for their negative remarks. The questions treat the reader like he’s ignorant of current events. Look at Question #3: “Do you agree with the Nancy Pelosi Democrat Majority’s decision to impose massive tax hikes on the American people?”

What Republican would say, “yes?”

Look at Question #7: “Do you support the Democrats’ efforts to give federal government bureaucrats complete control of your health care costs and choices?”

What Republican would say, “no?”

This survey is full of these types of questions where the answer is obvious given the audience. There seems to be no point to this “survey” other than getting an e-mail address.

What could the NRCC do better? At the very least they could have a form for people to send comments or an e-mail link to an inbox that was actually looked at.

The NRCC has a weblog that allows comments so they’re not opposed to accepting feedback. They weblog and the survey could have linked to each other letting people give their feedback.

The best the NRCC could do is ditch these loaded questions and actually ask their supporters/donors how they can better serve them. To me talking about the online media as a conversation feels cliche and soft, but it fits. The GOP in general is in a rut. The conservative base feels alienated and ignored. They need to be engaged. On the internet it’s all about interactivity and participation. People aren’t passive when they’re chatting with friends or uploading photos or writing weblog posts or making YouTube videos. They don’t want to sit there and be shoveled campaign messages. They want to feel like they’re part of it.

I would advise the NRCC to dump this survey and start a real conversation between the chairman Rep. Tom Cole and the NRCC staff and supporters. They should talk about the most contested races. Where does the NRCC think they have the best shot at taking Democratic seats? What issues resonate most in what localities? What’s the status of the
investigation of the NRCC’s finances?

Have give and take. There’s bound to be negative comments. They should be welcomed. There’s sure to be more wisdom and good ideas outside the NRCC than inside.

The NRCC could set the standard of how Republican organizations engage with supporters in our highly-networked, highly-interactive age. Listening to your customers works for the most successful businesses. The GOP should do the same.

[Cross-posted to The American Mind.]

So the NRCC was running this contest for the last month to have the grassroots do an online video answering the question: Has the Democratic Congress Worked for You? So last Wednesday I spent about four hours directing my kids in this little spot that I'm pretty happy with. Not perfect, but I think it's alot of fun. Directing my kids was the biggest challange and I now have alot more respect for those directors that deal with all those child stars.

The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) has released a YouTube video highlighting just how successful the Democrats have been since taking the reins.

Funny.

I guess now we understand why Congress has such a high approval rating. Via the RCP polling average:

11/01 - 11/14
* Approve: 23.3%
* Disapprove: 66.3%

Hollywood film director Josh Shultz, erm, I mean NRCC modern media guru Josh Shultz, nails it out of the park with his latest, a trailer for "The Mother of All Tax Hikes."

Scary. Almost as scary as this video response (heh):

Keep up the good work Josh.

We've been watching the National Republican Congressional Committee's (NRCC) efforts on the modern campaign trail and have thus far been impressed.

On Monday, the NRCC will take another important step to help our Congressional candidates by leading by example in the modern world with the official launch of the next phase of its user-generated contest, "Your Direction."

The first phase of the "Your Direction" contest as TechRepublican contributor and NRCC modern media guru Josh Shultz wrote earlier in this space was to ask the Republican community to come up with a new slogan. With more than 13,000 entries and votes, the slogan which ultimately won is “Has the Democratic Congress Worked For You?”

The simple answer for me is no, the Democratic Congress has not worked for me. But, I'm a partisan operative so I might be a little bias.

But it turns out the American people agree. In fact, in a Reuters/Zogby poll released this past Wednesday, a mere 11 percent of Americans give Congress a passing grade. Pathetic.

So what are we going to do about this?

Well normally we'd all sit around and complain about Congress' lack of movement on the issues important to us. But not today. Thanks to the second phase of the NRCC's user-generated contest which asks users to take the slogan, create a YouTube video, and submit it to the NRCC via www.YourDirectionContest.com - there's something more effective and better we can do: We can participate in the national discussion.

For more details on the contest, check out Josh's killer YouTube video announcing the contest which already has been viewed more than 111K times on YouTube (viral much?):

You can also find more details on the contest at www.yourdirectioncontest.com.

Solid contest team NRCC. Watch this space for our submission in the very near future.

[Promoted to the front by David. Godspeed Blogonowski.]

As a regular reader of this blog I wanted to let you know that I will be blogging tomorrow on the campaign trail with Jim Ogonowski's campaign. I will be bloging from the Jim Ogonowski campaign headquarters tomorrow. This has been a great race so far and there is a lot of support for Jim. A lot of you have been watching this race closely and I wanted to be sure that you had the chance to follow us in the NeTrail tomorrow.

The MassGOP has MassRoots as our blog but we are proud to be blogging tomorrow over at HubPolitics. Hope to see you there.

The NRCC’s latest Rediscover video focuses on the importance of protecting conservative free speech and features Rep. Mike Pence.

It’s well worth the watch.

Additionally, the video encourages activists to sign the petition launched by Congressman Eric Cantor (R-VA), at www.StandWithRush.com and stand with Rush Limbaugh who is the latest target of Democrats’ attempts to distract from their growing list of failures.

The petition, previously posted on here, already has over 13,000 signatures.

Let’s make sure it continues to grow.

www.standwithrush.com

The National Republican Congressional Committee recently picked up the video camera and sat down with several Republican House members to ask them about the most pressing issues facing voters today, and why the Republicans can, and will, win back the Majority. The series, which was launched last week, is called "Rediscover Your Party,” and will run from now until the fall. Members of Congress who participated in the inaugural “Rediscover Your Party” series include NRCC Chairman Tom Cole (OK), Republican Leader John Boehner (OH), Republican Whip Roy Blunt (MO), Rep. Marsha Blackburn (TN), Rep. Kevin McCarthy (CA), Rep Jeb Hensarling (TX), Rep. Patrick McHenry (NC), Rep. Mike Pence (IN) and Rep. Candice Miller (MI).

What I’m hearing a lot of from activists and supporters is that, yes, they want to know why Democrats are wrong for America– but now more than ever, they want to know what Republicans stand for and what they’re doing to reshape the country we live in. Well, they’d be happy to know we’re listening.

We took some of the questions our supporters emailed and then sat a few of our members down and started a conversation.

The first episode was about the importance of defeating our terrorist enemies overseas, while today’s episode highlights the importance of earmark reform.

The interviews, which were shot a few weeks back- were digitally transferred to uncompressed Quick Time files, then color-corrected in Final Cut Pro. Each individual episode, which will have an approximate run time of 3 minutes, has been edited in Adobe Premiere.

Thus far the response to the series has been overwhelming. Although this is only series one of many, it’s important that we continue to reach our activists through online video. Look for more episodes in the upcoming weeks.

For more about the Rediscover series visit:

New York Times

Politico

Captain Quarters

Bluey Blog

RedState

 *Note, Josh Shultz is the Director of New Media for the NRCC.