The Media Campaign Against Sarah Isgur is Industry Discrimination

Nobody really believes the media's claims that it's non-partisan. But in recent years, the media's campaign to maintain its lefty monopoly has gone public. The New York Times and The Atlantic faced severe harassment for attempting to and for hiring conservative op-ed people. The harassment included employees coordinating with outside lefty media, like the Huffington Post.

The campaign against CNN for hiring Sarah Isgur, who had worked with Jeff Sessions, is the most high profile such monopolistic effort to date. 

It's also a blatantly partisan campaign, considering their comfort level with the likes of George Stephanopoulos​, who just struck a four year deal with ABC News which will see him making $18 million a year.

Political operatives are not a problem. The media is a traditional career path for them. 

CNN hired Sarah Isgur in the hopes of getting some inside DOJ perspective from a former spokeswoman. But the media is paranoid about anyone, in any way, associated with the right, getting a foothold in its industry.

The hysteria over Sarah Isgur is a reminder that the media's partisan tilt isn't accidental. It's the result of a calculated effort to keep conservatives out of an industry.

If this were being done to a racial or religious group, it would result in legal action.

Shouldn't efforts at suppressing conservative participation in an entire industry be treated as a matter of systematic discrimination?