For Oberlin’s resident media junkies, last Thursday felt like an early Christmas. At 4:30, Anthony Shadid, the Chief Islamic Affairs correspondent for the Washington Post discussed his experiences covering the war in Iraq and at 8, New York Times columnist David Brooks gave his case for a new kind of conservatism at Finney Chapel. It’s rare that we as students get to hear leading voices from the two most influential newspapers in the country; it’s rarer still that we get to hear both on the same day.

As News Editor of the Oberlin Review, it was my good fortune to cover both of these talks. I started the day stressed out and cynical, and when I finished, I was still stressed out and cynical. However, I believe I learned some things about what being a journalist really means.

Brooks’ speech was the more publicized of the two events. He started out by giving the exact same autobiographical speech he gave at Oberlin last March, which included the exact same jokes about rich liberals that have been part of his shtick since he joined the pantheon of punditry almost a decade ago. I’m sorry, but I just don’t find Ultimate Frisbee jokes that funny anymore.

Brooks also vented his indignation at how the liberal elite doesn’t have any respect for the simple, hardworking Americans who live in suburban enclaves throughout the red states and work hard to provide for their family and teach their children good values. I read Brooks’ columns a lot, and as far as I can remember, any time he’s mentioned these elusive ur-Americans, he’s followed it up with some joke about power mowers, Home Depot, or Nascar so I’m not exactly sure how he defines condescension.

He finished by articulating his new vision for the Republican Party. If the Republican Party’s guiding principles were anywhere near as noble as Brooks makes them sound, I would trade in my Volvo for something with a Hemi and hit the road for red-state land today, but the reality is that any party as steeped in corporate cronyism, corruption and reactionary ideology as the Republicans could never hope to be the catalyst for “limited, engaged government” that Brooks envisions, and to say that the Democrats are worse — even if that were true — is not really much of an argument. Brooks is deluding himself if he thinks that John McCain and Arnold Schwarzenegger are the future of the Republican Party. They are its past.

Normally, David Brooks doesn’t bother me that much but last Thursday I had spent the afternoon listening to Anthony Shadid, a man who in my opinion showed the best of what journalism can be. So my patience for Brooks’ self indulgent prattling was lower than normal, and I came out of Finney Chapel that night wishing that the king of the cuddly conservatives took the time to stop by West Lecture Hall that afternoon.

I’ve covered a seemingly endless number of Middle East related lectures in my year and two weeks as Review reporter, but Shadid did what none of the other speakers had ever done and what journalists are supposed to do: he let others do the talking for him.

Through his knowledge of Arabic, Shadid was able to speak to and connect with ordinary Iraqis in a way that few western journalists have been able to. His longtime friend Khalid Medani introduced him by talking about his uncanny ability to put interviewees at ease and earn their trust. I do not doubt it. These portraits, which Shadid illustrated, presented a far more nuanced view of Iraqi sentiment than I’ve ever heard from the Western media.

If voices like those that Shadid interviewed had made their way into the American political dialogue before the war, they would have exposed as lies, and the claims made by Rumsfeld and Cheney that Americans would be welcomed as liberators in Iraq. They would also have made it a lot harder for certain New York Times columnists to argue that the U.S. has the obligation to go around the world remaking nations in its own image.

Shadid’s insights on Iraq were enlightening, but they made me wish that more reporters like him were working within our borders as well. If we had a better understanding of what the U.S. electorate really wanted from its government, we wouldn’t have to rely on the tired red-state blue-state clichés that Brooks has made his career on.

I would like to thank Mr. Shadid for sharing his insights on a story that we in the United States are only beginning to understand and also Mr. Brooks for making this aspiring member of the liberal media conspiracy think a little more carefully about what he believes. Also thanks to everyone in the Oberlin College faculty and administration who helped to bring both these speakers to campus. You really made my day.