Letters to the Editor
Kryptik
Published Letters: 47
-
Kurtz is so telling...
[Read the article: The U.S. establishment media in a nutshell]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Don't you love how Kurtz seems to take credit for the new 'scrutiny' Obama gets, and yet washes his hands of the whole 'Obama's too elitist' meme like he had no hand in having it pushed? Objective media criticism, eh?
The fact that Obama's bowling becomes an issue, but...say...McCain's sordid past is cause for celebration and lionizing (look at Michael Scherer's piece on him via TIME)? The kind of stuff that if Democrats admitted half of it, they'd be crucified and told they were unfit to be any sort of leader?
All this stuff is so galling, and we're just fed more and more of it...
-
Drezner's 'Past Vs. Future'
[Read the article: Megan McArdle and Dan Drezner's defense of the media]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think Drezner's insistence that the press is more concerned with 'matters of the future than matters of the past' was telling.
Just yesterday, Michael Scherer's take on the predicted candidate responses to the Petraeus testimony was about 'future vs. past', with McCain representing the future (we leave, and Iraq goes to hell!) while the Democrats represent the past (why are we listening to the people who made the awful strategies that brought us to where we are now?). And Drezner's dismissal of looking back in retrospect is the problem.
One can not accurately judge the future without looking back at the past. While the past won't necessarily dictate what happens or what will work in the future, what it DOES dictate is what WON'T work. And that's why it's important to look back. Look at what didn't work, and don't do it again. You know the old cliche: "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it"? It's just like that, except it's an odious, more willful ignorance we face.
This is one of the many reasons why we get hacks like the Kagans, Michael O'Hanlon, Ken Pollack, et. al. who continue to remain 'serious' people despite their consistent wrongness: the media continues to refuse to look back in any sort of genuine way and wonder 'what did they do wrong? What did WE do wrong?'
-
@-zack-
[Read the article: Megan McArdle and Dan Drezner's defense of the media]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It's funny too, that there could be a real case that such demand is essentially artificial.
Remember the Politico snit over the Edwards haircut thing? Their excuse was that it was their duty to cover the story, because the public was interested in it. And their proof that it was a matter of public interest? It was reported in Politico!
It's a circular logic that results in self-fulfilling prophecy. They push a story that they insist is of public importance, and run it on repeat for 3 weeks. The public is forced to consume it for lack of other substantial news, and then the media points out how many people are watching for that story and say 'see! people are watching it! That means they WANT to see stories like this!'
It's how we got weeks of Anna Nicole Smith and Natalie Holloway.
-
"Change the Rules" - Isn't that the point?
[Read the article: The harmony between the Right and the media]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"if you're uncomfortable with it, then change the rules or don't run for office."
Shouldn't that be the exact point? Becaues if the rules mean that you have to excel at petty drummed up issues like this that have absolutely no genuine bearing on how things will be under a certain person as president (oh noes, Obama doesn't wear flag pins, that means he's going to take away OUR flag pins, and we all know that's the only way to show our patriotism!), then the rules are broken. Shuck 'em and **** 'em, those aren't rules that are constructive toward choosing an effective leader.
-
Sad state of the media
[Read the article: Brian Williams nominates Peggy Noonan for a Pulitzer Prize]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This, and the continued breathless shock over Wright and Obama, shows that the media has long since gone of the deep end into utter uselessness, where even once sane outlets have deigned to consider the Obama campaign 'done' over comments by a pastor that remain insane only when taken in soundbites...which is sadly all that the news media operates on now.