There's a brouhaha brewing over former ABC news anchor and current Emerson College journalism professor Carole Simpson's public endorsement of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign last month. Simpson now says the endorsement was an unwise decision, and has revealed that she offered her resignation to Emerson; however, the college has very wisely declined to accept it. Of course, right-wing bloggers like Michelle Malkin and Hugh Hewitt are brandishing this story as Exhibit A in their quixotic crusade to prove that the media is biased in favor of liberals. But this story is less than it seems.
Explanation after the jump....
First, Simpson wasn't a reporter when she endorsed Clinton, but instead a private citizen, having left ABC prior to taking up the Emerson professorship. As a citizen, she has a right to support, openly if she wishes, any political candidate of her choosing, as well as advocate on that candidate's behalf.
Second, Simpson's status as a university professor doesn't require that she abrogate this right to openly advocate for her political viewpoint. After all, many university professors, such as Marty Feldstein at Harvard, Robbie George at Princeton, and (yes) Condoleeza Rice at Stanford, have been vocal supporters and servants of this Republican president, with nary a peep of concern raise by conservatives.
Finally, the ABC network continues to employ John Stossel as an investigative reporter, despite his long-standing ties to conservative advocacy groups like Capitalism magazine and the Young America's Foundation. I don't hear Malkin, Hewitt, and their friends on the right demanding Stossel's ouster on the grounds that he openly advocates in favour of a political agenda despite calling himself a reporter. It is therefore hypocritical for them to be taking Emerson to task for following Stossel's example.
