Why does the media support Republicans so much?

Why is the major media so often reduced to mouthing Republican talking points? I'm kind of old (47 this year) and I recall a time when the media (both press and television) were tough on Republicans and Democrats alike. In 1976 the media went after Gerald Ford for stating that Poland was free of Soviet influence. During Carter's years in the White House the media made no secret of Carter's problems governing, and after the hostages were taken in Iran the media kept up a daily drumbeat of "It's day 366 of the Iranian hostage crisis".
And than Reagan came along.
Certainly early coverage of Reagan was somewhat critical. Reagan's factual errors and lies filled books (look up Reagan's Reign of Error sometime), but somewhere between 1981 and 1989 the media became afraid of criticizing Republicans in any meaningful way. When hostages were taken in Lebanon, there was no "day 400 of the Lebanon hostage crisis". Heck most of those hostages were held far longer than the hostages in Iran, but somehow under a Republican it wasn't an issue. When Reagan ran in 1984 there were questions about his advanced age and fitness for office, well founded questions as it turns out, as during Reagan's final years he was at best senile. But all Reagan had to do was deliver a well rehearsed line about Mondale's youth and the Washington Pundits proclaimed he'd "put the issue away". When it was obvious that vice President George H. W. Bush was lying about his involvement in Iran Contra, and newsman Dan Rather's called him on it, the "liberal media" only covered Bush's well rehearsed comeback, pretending that Bush had cleared his name by refusing to answer a question regarding his own illegal behavior. When Bush left office in 1993 he pardoned all the people involved in Iran/Contra just to save his hide. Through the 1990s the media became worse, declaring a "scandal" whenever the Republicans made an accusation against President Clinton (and every accusation the Republicans against Clinton were lies accept one) the media covered it without question. When President Clinton was being impeached for cheating on his wife, the Washington Media knew full well that Speaker Gingrich has been having a longtime affair with a staffer, and they knew that the leader of the impeachment trial Henry Hyde had himself been in a 5 year affair with a married woman that destroyed her family - yet the inside-the-beltway media remained silent. During the 2000 election the media was all too happy to repeat the lie that "Al Gore said he invented the Internet" while at the same time none dared speak the obvious truth about Governor Bush - that he was a bit of a boob. Only Micheal Kinsley in October of 2000 had the guts to point out that Bush had a sub par intelligence, but the media was too in love with their story that "Gore is a liar". Since than President Bush allowed the attacks of 9/11, invaded Iraq using lies to get the public to go along, broken the law more times than anyone can remember, lost a city....need one go on? Now lets look at the present election. We have John McCain and Barack Obama - and does the media cover the election in a way that approached fairness? Of course not - they continue to repeat Republican talking points on a daily basis. The Washington Post prints 2-3 anti-Obama pro-McCain opinion pieces every day. Most of the media cooperating with the McCain campaign, making Obama the issue rather than who's better, Obama or McCain.
I think it comes down to the well organized campaign by conservatives, whom for decades have been bleating about a "liberal media", and the weak kneed media bends over backwards to accommodate them. Of course the conservatives never let up, so stations like CNN still report falsehoods against Democratic candidates and don't touch real questions about the character of Republicans.