...I don't think either issue explains most cases, but rather a interesting combination. Most intimidated journalists don't have the courage to tell their readers/viewers that they've been intimidated: otherwise, how could they lay claim to such titles as "the most trusted source in news"? But their cowardice extends beyond that silence. Most people -- and here, I think Enderin is a good example -- want very much to think well of themselves. So not only can they not admit their cowardice to their readers, they can't admit it to themselves.

That's where advocacy comes in. If you're "helping the little guy" then the compromises you make with the facts, with an honest assessment of what's going on, with the silences and the loud indignations -- all of which favor the people you're afraid of -- then you can think most highly of yourself, curry their favor, and present yourself, in all good conscience, as a crusader for truth and justice.

And of course, if at the same time, you can take some swipes at that irritatingly morally superior Jews, a couple of dollops of moral Schadenfreude, maybe even an occasional sadistic comparison with Nazis or Apartheid racists, then who's going to complain but a bunch of whiney Jews...