Letters to the Editor
-
Media Complicity
And now, we are watching these same media outlets enthusiastically support the candidacy of the Bush White House's designated successor, John McCain, to be the next president and continue this wonderful tradition.
And it will likely work, again.
-
Who cares?
ex-generals spewing pentagon propaganda on CNN? Shockers!
Can we stick to real issues? Like how candidate What's-His-Face hates the flag.
-
"Semi-official sources"
Maybe this doesn't grab people as an issue because they've always assumed retired military officers on TV were still enough on board to spout the party line.
The term we use for these "analysts" in other countries is "semi-official sources". Heck, Fox News is a semi-official organ of the Bush/Cheney administration.
-
Better journalists and Democrats, please.
How can "news" organizations refuse to address -- just completely ignore -- accusations which fundamentally indict their behavior as "journalists"?
One supposes much the same way Congress refuses to address the admitted illegal actions taken by the Bush Administration: there are minimal (if any) incentives or prompts for the current leadership of either group to actually do so.
Replacing the controlling interests of either or both groups is a long-term enterprise, something I suspect Americans still haven't fully internalized given the addiction to 'quick fixes' and stopping armeggedon before the next commercial break. How many times has the Administration invoked a scenario featuring 'Jack Bauer' to successfully silence or at least dissuade its critics?
Stories like this, disseminated ever further and wider, certainly help but alone aren't sufficient. Boycotting advertisers, running better candidates for office, deluging editors and publishers with letters and emails, refusing to play by 'established' rules, and so on are all part of this and will doubtless take some time to yield tangible results.
In short, we know what the problems are, but solutions are going to take a long time and a lot of work to accomplish. Best we understand that now and get to it.
-
What a Sham.....
Is anyone really supprised?. When I opened my Sunday Morn NYT and saw the expose' I thgouht, boy is this going to ruffel some feathers, not even a peep!. Until the American people demmand more and as long as Deal or no Deal / American Idol take in more viewers than read / watch the news,the mainstream media will not change. Sad commentary on our Nation durring such a critical time, History will not judge us well........
-
Keep chipping away, Glenn.
The media's monolithic cone of silence speaks volumes in and of itself.
-
Principles? What principles?
I hardly expect any of the bosses or anchors at the major news organizations to show up and say "gee, we were total idiots at best and government stooges at worst throughout this whole thing, you know? Now, for a word from our sponsors ..."
Yeah right. You expect them to do that now?
We have spilled millions of words in print and pixels about how news organizations used to be subsidized by networks and now are expected to be profit centers. But I suggest this case is worse than that. Any voice -- or any conduit for any voice -- that had anything negative to say about Bush or his Iraq adventure at the time would have been driven straight out of business with screams from the right about treason.
There might have been individuals that would have been willing to sacrifice their careers to do the right thing, but they would have been quickly stopped, fired, and replaced with someone who knew which side of the bread the butter was on.
As for now, this story will stay on the fringe Internet and maybe it will catch on, maybe not.
-
While waiting...
Evidently American marquee politcal media "news outlets" feel quite safe and protected in being so Pravda like in practice and conduct.
One is left to wait and wonder how long what should(must?)follow takes to come about.
That being the rot and decay of WashingtonDC and corruption of American political media being taken apart,taken down with new and restored put in place.
American Militarism and a fawning,submissive and non-performing American core political media when combined yield just what GG so aptly describes here again.
WashingtonDC will continue to ignore this rot and decay until hit over and over with consequences of that ignorance.
As for American political media one would think the so called 'free marketplace' would suffice to inflict pain for poor or craven conduct. Should that fail(very likely all things considered) when WashingtonDC gets overhauled then perhaps American political media should be given a clean sweep of stupidity,craveness and callous complicity as well.
Waiting...
-
THE WEEKLY STANDARD explains : It's not a news story - - the only thing that happened is that "The Pentagon distributed talking points"
As explained at The Standard:
http://weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/
/2008/04/nytimes_exclusive_generals_kno.aspThe paper [the New York Times] offers no evidence that any of these men were using their influence to directly further a personal interest (unless one counts "networking"), and it offers no evidence of coercion on the part of the administration.
No need to actually see the NYTimes article, folks.
"The Weekly Standard" has already explained that there's no news there.
-
DrEyeBall
I hardly expect any of the bosses or anchors at the major news organizations to show up and say "gee, we were total idiots at best and government stooges at worst throughout this whole thing, you know? Now, for a word from our sponsors ..."
Yeah right. You expect them to do that now?
No, of course I don't expect them to do so. But it's still worth noting that these are the same people who pretend to object when political officials refuse to comment on stories revealing their corrupt conduct.
There is value in writing about and exposing how corrupt these media outlets are. It discredits them further and sullies their brand. Doing so doesn't signify "surprise" or shock that they're like this.
As for now, this story will stay on the fringe Internet and maybe it will catch on, maybe not.
The story, of course, originated on the front-page of the NYT. These stories do pop up in establishment journalism circles. They are losing credibility and audience. It's important, I think, not to insist that none of this matters. Things can change and, with respect to these media outlets, are changing -- slowly and incrementally, to be sure, but I think they are ripe for having their influence eroded much further still.