Letters to the Editor
-
banality of evil
This is the subtitle of Hannah Arendt's book "Eichmann in Jerusaleum" where she describes the life of a bureaucrat who did bad stuff.
Glenn uses this word toward the end of his article describing how reporters have strayed from doing the hard work to get a story correct and become ambulance chasers looking for the gory detail that catches on.
Another example of making political dialogue trival.
-
Ben Smith is not a bad guy
One point that I think is notable is that Smith -- notwithstanding the series of highly questionable and Drudge-affirming articles he has churned out -- is no fire-breathing, Machiavellian, scheming right-wing operative. By all accounts, including from many people who are familiar with him and his pre-Politico journalism, he's perfectly decent and ethical and almost certainly not someone who subscribes to right-wing political views.
When I worked for a friend of mine as he ran for Congress in the 11th district here in Brooklyn last year, Ben Smith's political blog at NY Daily News was, for me, far and away the best resource among the several NY political blogs. He seemed like a very good reporter and a decent guy.
I've been disappointed with some of his work at The Politico but I hold out hope that he will "come back to us" in time.
-
Mr Smith goes to Allbritton
Mr. Smith first starts by demeaning and belittling any questions raised about Politico. He keeps repeating “Conspiracy”. Then makes sure to announce that he is a senior person at Politico. Mr. Smith blanket defends Politico and its policies in one breath and then admits that he doesn’t really know any facts about its policies. Just casual viewing of Mr. Smith and his “logic” it appears he lives inside the beltway vacuum. You should trust Politico and me because I say so. Not because any excellence in journalism but because I know all the clichés about political reporting (“It’s not Watergate!”) and I shouldn’t be criticized (My readers are Insiders).
-
The fish rots from the head
Individual reporters have their strengths and weaknesses, their biases (sometimes recognized, usually unconscious), along with varying degrees of curiosity and courage. There is plenty to disparage -- and encourage -- within the profession. But reporters don't live in a vacuum -- they get paid, promoted (or not) and fired based on how well they serve the people who write their paychecks. Reporters noticed Ashley Banfield get demoted and finally fired for being critical of the Bush administration's war in Iraq, they saw Robert Scheer lose his job at the LA Times to be replaced by Jonah (!!!!) Goldberg, they saw Donahue lose his highly rated show because he criticized the Bush regime, they saw Judith Miller write lie after lie in the NYTimes with no consequences (until much too late). Reporters and editors surely internalized this culture of intimidation, even if they didn't mean to. Some -- who were strong and sure of themselves, or had publishers willing to hang it all out -- bucked the trend, but most either worked for large "don't rock the boat" corporations, or groups who actively backed Bush. They toed the line, many probably not even realizing they were doing so. So, yes, blame them for enabling the rot, but realize where the stench is really coming from.
-
Failure of Education....
Since I never raised children, I had the luxury of being able to ignore whatever has been happening in our schools for quite a while now. It's clear to me now that whatever it was, its now a major contributer to the current pollution of our discourse.
While, as you point out, individual reporters are merely churning out whatever is rewarded institutionally by their organizations, in the meantime those higher up in the organization are concentrating their efforts on determining whatever will do the most to enhance revenue flow.
We can all see the results of this process, which of course moves expensive haircuts and continuing saga's of missing pretty white women to the fore of news coverage. (Never underestimate the power of that photo that accompanies the 10 second teaser for the next segment)
So, as I assert, the lousy news coverage is demand driven, how can we create demand for substantive coverage? Why, in school of course. If we were doing an adequate job of teaching that the demands of citizenship include paying attention, developing informed opinions and voting, then (eventually) the demand for decent serious news coverage would grow.
Needless to say, the process takes years to accomplish, but it is simply one of the better investments we can make in our future.
-
Yes, journalists do as they are told
That's how they get paid. Of course, the Politico exists not as a money-making endeavor so much as a propaganda vehicle. Traditionally, there hasn't been that much difference between profit and propaganda, though. Many journalists start their careers at small newspapers where the publisher exerts evident, if not obvious, pressure on the newsroom to produce stories that keep his friends happy and that ensure he sits with the kewl kids at the weekly Rotary lunch, where he drums up ad dollars. They learn bad habits and bad news judgements in those newsrooms, and they never shake them. Then, at bigger papers they learn how to lift and rewrite wire stories and competitors' stories after they've been scooped by either or both. When you've been scooped, reaction time is the ONLY thing that matters: accuracy is the least of your worries, and the goal of any original reporting is only to find the tiniest thread on which to hang the story. So if the original scoop was full of falsehoods, the followups will be little better, and before the age of blogs and the Internet, few of us knew better.
-
We should be aware of what other people are selling, and of what we ourselves are selling.
There's nothing wrong with liking other people, nor with liking ourselves, but some of us may be a bit lacking in self-awareness. Here's a statement by a guy you might not think of as being likable, about another guy you might not think of as being likable.
http://cbs5.com/topstories/local_story_135185122.html
cbs5.com / kpix tv
May 15, 2007
Larry Flynt Statement On Death Of Jerry Falwell
. . . My mother always told me that no matter how much you dislike a person, when you meet them face to face you will find characteristics about them that you like. Jerry Falwell was a perfect example of that.
I hated everything he stood for, but after meeting him in person, years after the trial, Jerry Falwell and I became good friends. He would visit me in California and we would debate together on college campuses.
I always appreciated his sincerity even though I knew what he was selling and he knew what I was selling.
- - Larry Flynt