Admit It Then

If this is where you want to go, then go there already.

But don’t keep blithering on about the importance of maintaining traditional media and your noble truth-telling. We’ve always had a partisan press. We’ve always had a cheap press, too. What’s new right now is a supposedly high-minded press wanting to claim all the privileges of saintly journalism while simultaneously selling out to the easiest possible option.

But if you think for a second it’s going to buy your ass out of purgatory with the wingnuts, think again.This was the headline on Red State last night:

Treat the Press as Enemy Collaborators

Good luck with your new friends.

A.

4 thoughts on “Admit It Then

  1. adrastos says:

    Tina Brown is a troll. Plain and simple.

  2. montag says:

    Newsweek has been a den of iniquity for a long time. Their first problem was enforcing writing according to reading grade levels. Their second problem was kissing the ass of every right-winger to come along. Do they really want to know where their readership went?
    They abandoned them. Their editorial policy can be summarized as “write about what interests the inside-the-Beltway crowd and try to market those views to the rest of the country.”
    I don’t think I’ve readNewsweek with any regularity since the early `80s. And it looks as if they’ve gotten much, much worse in the intervening years.

  3. MapleStreet says:

    Admittedly, yellow journalist got an emmy for its performance with the good ship Maine.
    Being in a rural town, I am accutely aware of those who buy small town newspapers and then use them as a pulpit to drive the community affairs in their desired direction.
    But I am still taken aback that Newsweek got rid of fact checkers in ’96. If they’re not gonna make sure they are accurate, then why should I pay attention to them.
    Of course, this weekend the local TV station, covering SE Iowa and NE Missouri, using the network slogan where they feature each of their reporters with fancy background music and a voice over of “John Doe. Because Accuracy Matters!” has a great example of why you want to check your facts. Admittedly, they got caught in the rapid evolution of a story that began at 4:30 on Friday afternoon.
    Quickly they launched a couple of links to KC web pages that explosives were found in a car near the KC Federal Building.
    By Friday evening the facts were out. Some guy, supposedly on the witness protection program after providing info regarding another bombing (can’t remember if it was the failed WTC attempt or 9/11) walked in the Fed Building and asked if he was on the Terrorist list. Feds thought this was odd. Bomb sniffing dog taken to his car supposedly indicated explosives in the car (Enough for the cops to have probably cause, but also feeding into the false idea that dogs are never wrong despite extensive evidence on both false negatives and false positives). Police searched the car and found no explosives.
    All weekend, the links indicates a title of “Explosives found…” despite one of the linked articles had almost immediately changed the title on their page to **NO** explosives… Meanwhile, the local TV didn’t change their info and I know of several folks here who continued to put this together with Al Q and Timothy McVeigh. (We’re close enough to KC that McVeigh is much more than some abstract idea).
    Finally on Sunday I wrote an email asking the station to edit their web page to reflect the developing facts and stop the needless terror of folks still thinking that there was another McVeigh-style bombing attempt.
    Haven’t heard crickets chirping back from the station.

  4. MapleStreet says:

    Just watched a clip of Jon Stewart ragging on Romney’s 47% video. In it, he brings out all sorts of esoteric trivia, such as a video of Romney’s mother talking about how Romney’s father fled Mexico to the USA and the first few years received welfare and other aid. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jon-stewart-tears-apart-romneys-assertions-about-the-dependent-47-percent/
    Even accounting for the fact that the fan base is likely to run across items and email them in (which, incidentally means that Comedy Central, The Daily Show, or other associated business must then hire people to sort through the deluge of incoming emails)… Even accounting that as a comedy schtick Stewart can take a detail and really drag it out vs. the need of news media to be succinct and even as far as to say that the details have to all fit in the lead paragraph (outdated, I know)…
    How is it the Stewart can give the appearance of having a rather robust fact checking organization while the news media can’t worry about details????

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: