There's a good piece in Slate today by Paul Krugman talking about the Progressive Revolution that apparently won't be televised. 

His piece is not expressly about the media ignoring the increasing liberalization of the electorate.  But he does point out how

the reaction of the news media to the first clear electoral manifestation of America's new liberalism—the Democratic sweep in last year's congressional elections—was almost comical in its denial.

Thus, in 1994, Time celebrated the Republican victory in the midterm elections by putting a herd of charging elephants on its cover. But its response to the Democratic victory of 2006—a victory in which House Democrats achieved a larger majority, both in seats and in the popular vote, than the Republicans ever did in their 12-year reign—was a pair of overlapping red and blue circles, with the headline "The center is the place to be."

Unsurprisingly, media consolidation seems to favor a politically more conservative slant in content, from news to entertainment.  The so-called liberal media only thrives with a true diversity of voices.  In fact, it's not an expressly ideological program that distinguishes liberalism so much as that diversity of voices, viewpoints, lifestyles and experiences.  And that's really all that's liberal about the "liberal media."  What we're seeing now is not only continuing consolidation of media resources, but a corresponding narrowing of what is represented, a leveling of the vital differences that make for democratic discourse.

This is why net neutrality is so important.  Because as overblown as the blogosphere may be, and as overcrowded with fatheads and blowhards as it surely is, it's more or less the face of our fair democracy.  It's no surprise that at the very moment technology is empowering and expanding discourse, the powers that be increasingly want to rein it in.

Another excellent point Krugman makes is that Progressives need to embrace partisanship.  That flies in the face of another meme old media's been spreading that the answer to the nation's problems is bipartisanship.  Krugman says, not so much. 

So, here's my worry: Democrats, with the encouragement of people in the news media who seek bipartisanship for its own sake, may fall into the trap of trying to be anti-Bushes—of trying to transcend partisanship, seeking some middle ground between the parties.

That middle ground doesn't exist—and if Democrats try to find it, they'll squander a huge opportunity. Right now, the stars are aligned for a major change in America's direction. If the Democrats play nice, that opportunity may soon be gone.

The Left is sometimes so sure of the rightness of its cause that it won't deign to fight for it (the "Waiting on the world to change" crowd).  Or convinced of how self-evident it is, they're unable to articulate it themselves.  Will Progressives find the will to seize the day?  Krugman is right: there's no time like the present.