As I have said before, Glenn, we have to take back control of at least one of the major networks. This is a job more vital, more satisfying, and more necessary for the health of the nation even than the elimination of the Blue Dog Democrats.

I couldn't agree more. What is needed is pin-point, razor-sharp criticism of the media stenography pool, amplified as much as possible, in order to embarrass and discredit these accomplices and get the sleeping masses to wake up to HOW the propaganda is being foisted on them, as well as the content of it itself. The weak, meek, and incestuous media is what needs to become the subject matter of the news. That message, amplified ad infinitum by the blogosphere and non-MSM, might just get a national conversation started. And if it did, that is when our work would really come into play.

Using the Accountability Now money for such a purpose, piggy-backed on efforts like those of Robert Greenwald and others, might just help build the distrust of the media that is so richly deserved.

Then make them work....HARD...to earn it back.

When are we going to have the powers that be start attacking the horrible monster?

Those shills at FOX, Brit Hume, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, et.al. will continue with their hate speech.

Where is the outrage?

If someone upstream in comments hasn't already pointed you the way, check out www.foxattacks.com, or click on my sig.

Glenn,

Excellent work on a subject that needs constant attention: the ultimate failure of the media to do their jobs, or worse, their actions as willing sycophants for a disasterously incompetent gov't. A few quick points:

1) Why not invite Tommy Boy onto Salon Radio for a 15 minute interview about his article? When he refuses or ignores you, make him the first (if he is in fact the first) person on your ongoing list of guests who refuse to come onto your show to talk about legitimate topics of common interest. And then put that list on a sidebar next to your blog posts so we can all watch the litany of stars accumulate as time goes by.

2) These are EXACTLY the stories that need WIDE circulation into the blogosphere, particularly among liberal groups, media watchdogs, and "fact-check" type organizations. Cross-referencing them as you and others do certainly helps in getting them attention (eventually) in more mainstream media. An exception would be the paid military analysts story, but we know why that turned out the way it did.

3) As you did in this article, include email addresses and phone numbers to the supervisors of the authors committing these acts of non-journalism so that we, bloggers, can inundate them with complaints. Surely at some point they will grow weary (or angry) of having their inboxes filled and message machines overrun with requests and demands that something be done about their subordinate's deplorable, "against-all-journalism" actions.

I'm sure there are more steps to consider in changing the media narrative, but is this a good start? Would other Salon readers be willing to do their part?

As we all (including Dick Cheney) know, controlling the message is the key. We need to mount some real efforts to take back that control, if it only means hounding the media incessantly until they start doing their jobs (a la Joe Klein as of late).

Glenn,

Have you watched the Charlie Gibson interview of Palin yet? If so, what did you think?

One day...

of actual substantive reporting from Glenn and now we're back to this. It must have been a 9/11 miracle.

So, Tibby, I guess things like "context" are just for suckers, eh?

More from that very same article:

The Obama campaign rejected Gutman’s comments.

“Obviously these comments do not reflect our frequently stated, crystal-clear view that families of the candidates should be off limits, and we hope that supporters on both sides will act accordingly,” Obama spokesman Bill Burton said in an e-mail, pointing out that Gutman has apologized in a statement to ABC News.

Earlier in the week, Obama said anyone spreading rumors about Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy would be fired.

“I think people’s families are off limits, and people’s children are especially off limits,” Obama said. “This shouldn’t be part of our politics.”

Just to head off Tibby's sure-to-come "Hannity Hackney-ism":

Making a statement and then apologizing publicly for it is a far cry from making same statements and standing by them, or worse, echoing them far and wide for all to hear, pick up on, then judiciously copy it down and parrot it elsewhere.

Take me down the rabbit hole. Raum didn't provide any examples.

This is SO the problem with the likes of you, Tibby. You fight tooth and nail to prove someone or something wrong, and then completely trash your own argument when compared to the big picture.

Now, if you have the ability to critically think, I challenge you to use it in answering the question:

Does your one quotation, which was disavowed and apologized for, prove the larger point being made that MANY liberals (as used in Raum's article) are out there trashing Palin and her family values? Does your "squirrel finding a nut" example just prove the overall point of GGs post?

I'm fairly certain the mental blockage that always seems to pop up in right-wingers minds when faced with intelligent argumentation, facts, and/or concepts such as "common sense" will prevent you from answering, but the challenge is there if you're able to wave your way through the brain fog.

Good luck with that.