well ... not /entirely/ to blame, is this ...

given what i just wrote re: the state of business and those that work in the field (including reporters) ... i forgot to mention that i imagine these reporters can easily be "blacklisted" by candidates who don't approve of the questions. is this career suicide for them, i don't know ... but it seems like an unfair proposition to ask working men and women to continually risk their job to do it well.

as a side note ... is it /possible/ that the "unfair" treatment the press gives the Clintons is a direct result of their blacklisting practices? i cite the GQ example in making this point.

I keep going back and reading King's e-mail. That this comes from a "professional" journalist with "20 plus" years of experience is just breathtaking. It was obviously written in a state of high dudgeon, and can only be seen as petulant, childish and very, very unprofessional.

How many of us have written an e-mail like this? Probably a lot us, but we had the good sense to "save as draft", go out and get some fresh air, then come back and delete it. And we're not even professional journalists!

I'll bet King and his good buddies are sitting around in some swanky bar, swilling single-malt scotch, and joking about us "rubes" who read blogs. But, I predict we'll get the last laugh. At the risk of using too many movie references in one sentence, the angry villagers with pitchforks are mad as hell, and we're not going to take it anymore.

Way to go Glenn! The work you do holding up a mirror to the traditional press, taking down their arrogance, exposing their bias is critical to the survival of this Republic. Someday, in the best of all possible worlds, I see you receiving the Congressional Medal of Honor. You're the main reason I come to Salon.

...because I think this episode [in Glenn's ongoing expose of the underbelly of what passes for much journalism today] is just one more example of the unintended consequences of technology...

For example... the combustion engine, largely blamed now for the state of our climate, was once (or eventually) hailed as a wonderful invention;

the air conditioner, which makes hostile climates hospitable, is also responsible for the over-development of hot/arid/humid and desert climates, straining all kinds of resources, especially water;

the blow-dryer, besides being a real boon on TV and movie sets, blow-dryers were also helpful in the days when colder winters and higher energy costs required some folks to put plastic over their windows, but now we finally understand their ultimate end: placing an over-emphasis on hair, having good hair, and good vs. bad hair days. No where is this seen more clearly than in TV news. John King is just one such exhibit.

* * *

So... even though I'm sympathetic to complaints about Mitt, I still think he may end up being the GOP's candidate, since he has the hair for it, and because it's always a beauty contest in GOP land. I guess someone just forgot to send that email or memo to the press, since they're still holding out hope for McCain.

King's over-reaction to Glenn's rather straightforward criticism shows his work doesn't get scutinized regularly. He is clearly unaccustomed to criticism. There is no snapping editor on his heels at CNN.

Bush knew that Iraq had lethal weaponry.

At the intervention of which you speak...

thanks...but sadly, and it is so so very,

so-so very sad. It's why we all need to indite!

~

I spoke with a returned Iraq American physician.

He was a combat surgeon. The 4th largest weapon,

arsenal stockpile, was in Iraq. The USA sole 'um it!

The piles of 155-rounds were not guarded at post-invasion.

Last week, the combat medic told me the truth. The American casualties look like scrambled eggs, post WPD's explosions.

Sad, indeed, and so very very sad. And that's the bad-news, but it's the dang honest darn horrible truth. GOPS are real bad creeps.

Or we could just stipulate that people actually have to use facts and logic before making judgments. It seems like that's been done here. If you disagree, perhaps you should indicate your reasons.

The problem is in the word profession or professional. Every profession I've come into contact with requires an advanced degree, or at the *very* least, a code of ethics. Every code of ethics I have ever read, or been held accountable to, requires the professional to confront the possibility that the interests of the professional may conflict or collide with the interests of the client.

Who is John King's client? The corporation that pays his salary, or the viewers who watch him? And, if you argue both, my question is, would an engineering firm and the project engineers be held accountable if a bridge they built collapses?

If there is no accountability, if it's all free market driven, if the whole premise is, we'll give you pap because it's all you will buy, then there is no professionalism involved, and let's not even speak of journalistic standards. You can't claim to be a professional if you excuse yourself with, the editor/corporate owners made me do it.

It only gathers the dust.

You may lose yer's balls!

No medal are necessary, Oh, eh.

I'm only, respectfully, saying,

Glenn must not join the military.

You said it seems like an unfair proposition to ask working men and women to continually risk their job to do it well.

I ask, Why?

Consider the salaries awaiting you if you do both, assuming that both are rewarded.

And that's the big question, obviously: Are risk and good journalism rewarded?

I'd guess Yes and No.

In the big picture, yes. In the small picture (the one you seem to be seeing), perhaps not.

So perhaps good, risky journalism is not for the weak. So what?

John King is incapable of introspection. When will the slavish McCain press pick up on his background, the fact that he divorced his first wife when she was seriously ill, the fact that he did so to marry heiress to a liquor fortune that was built on the foundation of bootlegging, gambling and graft?

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2000-02-17/news/haunted-by-spirits/full

The fact that he moved to Arizona specifically to run for Congress, as a complete and unapologetic carpetbagger? The fact that he was notorious for his unstatesmanlike dirty tricks when dealing with people who failed to toe his line. The fact that his wife, Cindy, broke many, many laws when she was addicted to pain pills, using a so-called charity to obtain the pills, ultimately getting a doctor's license revoked while herself getting into a diversion program she shouldn't have qualified for.

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1994-09-08/news/opiate-for-the-mrs