Does disagreement=bigotry?

Mary and Freddie at Nashville's Liberadio ("Raising the Bar Shouldn’t be Too Hard When It’s Dragging on the Ground") have linked to a virtual press release from David Brock's MediaMatters. Predictably, folks from the Left will seize on this opportunity to characterize disagreement as bigotry:

“I applaud CBS for listening to reason and canceling Imus in the Morning. Viewers and listeners sent the clear message that they would no longer tolerate bigotry on America’s airwaves. It is our hope that this incident will begin a broader conversation about the responsibility that news corporations, journalists, and media figures have to the American public. This is an opportunity for the media to truly raise the bar to a higher standard and return to the fundamentals of journalism.”

Let’s talk. You want examples of the “bigoted commentary rife on the cable networks and talk radio?” They’ve got examples - Limbaugh, O’Reilly, Savage, Boortz, Beck, Coulter, and Carlson."

Do Brock, Mary and Freddie think that everything broadcast in the Media is "journalism"? And though Mary and Freddie refer to the catalog of controversial statements from some non-Liberal media personalities, I suspect those are the worst/best examples they can assemble about these figures (with the exception of Michael Savage for whom they list a single statement).

But it's selective "rage," in my estimation. Even Al Gore has made a statement more "insensitive" than the Tucker Carlson comment highlighted by MediaMatters. And I don't see how any of the examples listed on the MediaMatters site amount to "journalism." Each example is, at most, from the op/ed genre.

Most importantly, it sounds like David Brock, et al would love to force every "controversial" (the boundaries for which are drawn/approved by America's Liberal Elite) Conservative public figure underground. I disagree that guess we should all be ashamed for criticizing Cindy Shriehan or daring to push back on the agenda of "the Jersey Girls."