Letters to the Editor
Uncle Fester
Published Letters: 1506 Editor's Choice: 13
-
@Juliebird
[Read the article: MSNBC's Shuster returns from suspension]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think we are coming at this from two different angles. I'm interested in Free Speech and the limits thereof. At any given time, on any given point, a lot of competing forces are trying to control what is said and what is not said and put forth their Narrative as the definitive version of what really is happening.
I listen, watch, and read a lot of stuff I don't agree with and find unpleasant and spiteful. This includes right wing talk radio and a lot of the "political" postings on Salon lately. Well, except for Imus. I always thought his show was crap.
But I think any healthy ecology has it's bottom feeders. If I only did commerce with the pure, I wouldn't do much commerce.
I may disagree with someone on 9 out of 10 issues, but I'm not ready to shitcan them because of that; they may still have insights to contribute.
So yes, I think Matthews got rightly torched over his coverage on the NH primary. And I think that he is a dinosaur stuck in the past that can't help but keep stepping in shit. I also don't think the pimp comment was appropriate. I was disappointed in Shuster for that.
But I also remember that Hardball and David Shuster have been almost alone in the mainstream media in continuing to persue the story of Convicted Felon Scotter Libby and Dick Cheney.
I'm glad to see that MSBNC is using more of Norah O'Donnell and Rachel Maddow. Rachel is great when calling Pat Buchanan out. But she has her bias and blind spots as well. So I have issues both with the old and the new.
My concern with Matthews is that he is now afraid to offer any critical analysis of the Clinton campaign. I don't think that is good.
On the larger point as to nature and role of shows like Hardball and the media in general. I would agree. I think we are in trouble.
But I think that in order to fix the media, we need to fix ourselves first. Blaming the media doesn't work for me. Some think that the internet will be instrumental in shifting the balance of power, information and perception. Somedays I agree with that. If Salon is an example of the best that a liberal and enlightened community can offer (even when you subtract out the RoveBots) then I'm not so sure.
-
Bill O
[Read the article: MSNBC's Shuster returns from suspension]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't care if you call people out for saying things like Shuster did but there really needs to be some consistency in the Media. People that complain about MSNBC need to hold the same standards for FoxNews and CNN as well.
We could start with Salon. I could be wrong, but I didn't see anything in War Room or Broadsheet about Michelle's statement and/or Bill's lynching party response. Maybe I'm not searching correctly. Or not.
-
@web news:Talking heads and the balance/concentration of power
[Read the article: MSNBC's Shuster returns from suspension]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As far as video goes, my guess is that Salon is looking at streaming trends (way up), other sites and "Web 2.0" and wants to stay hip. Thus video.
What I'm interested is who/what is defining the terms of discussion, i.e. what's on the Information menu. It doesn't really matter if you get to choose one from column A and one from column B when what you really want is a pizza. Most of our political discussions these days leave me feeling why can't I get that pizza. Other countries have pizza.
For example, we don't seem to be getting much FISA telcom immunity coverage outside of Countdown and Greenwald. Fox News seems to be sticking solely to the Republican "side".
Our founders were shrewd judges of human nature despite their other numerous failures. They were leery of the concentration of power, including concentrating that power in the hands of the masses. They called it the mob back then. The 70% approval rating for the Iraq war pre-invasion demonstrates that being a member of a large group of people does not automatically confer wisdom.
So I'm hopeful (somedays) that the Internet will improve honesty and transparency and the quality of our news by diluting that concentration of power.
-
@Pointblank: Double standards now?
[Read the article: MSNBC's Shuster returns from suspension]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I thought that the entire point of Equality, was well, Equality.
It's OK to suggest that Patreaus is a prostitute and selling out his country because he is a) Male and b) in the Military, but don't pick on poor little Chelsea because she's a girl?
I'm of the position that it's generally inappropriate to use that language in a newscast. Period. Others have posted that the popular lexicon has shifted, and pimping no longer means just I what I thought it means. OK, maybe. I'll be posting that "Get Off My Lawn" sign soon then.
But I have to reject your double standards. And Reality looks just fine from here. Chelesa is now an adult and she no longer leads a low profile life. She has chosen of her own free will to campaign for her mom on the national stage. Good for her. I respect that. She deserves common courtesy like anyone else, but if she can't surf the big waves, she should stay on land.
-
@1st amendment: Yeah but
[Read the article: MSNBC's Shuster returns from suspension]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What I thought Juliebird was saying is that they are Journalistic Standards in the U.S. Reporters should report just the facts, not lard them with opinion. I agree with this expectation. The Commentators get to opine at length. Shuster is usually (though not always) in the role of a reporter.
I suppose you could assert that the "pimping" is a statement of fact, not a subjective assertion, an uphill battle given the language used.