Archive for category Media Criticism

Rumsfeld For Press Secretary

So President Bush needs a new press secretary, and Ed Driscoll has a couple of candidates. My own would be to have Don Rumsfeld slide over to take that position. Who better to do battle with the forces of darkness every day? Now that al qaida is on the run, he can turn his attention to islamofascism’s last bastion of support.

After watching him actually say “my goodness gracious” in response to a question from a reporter the other day at a press conference that was mainly about how some tough guy generals were complaining about how mean Rumsfeld was — a regular Dinsdale Piranha — I knew he was a black belt in verbal aikido. Of course he said it while the look on his face said “you are a moron who smells like stinky cheese, bigtime. And I mean bigtime on both the moron and the smell.” Since most communication is mostly non-verbal, you need a guy who can communicate so well both verbally and physically.

And the left would clearly like him, since they didn’t think McClellan was a good speaker, unlike Rumsfeld.

Tags:

Tempest Meet Teapot

Hugh Hewitt makes a good point about the media pushing the story about dissenting generals calling for Rumsfelds resignation:

Why are MSMers Broder and Dionne willing to assign such great credibility to a half dozen generals (out of at least 4,700 and perhaps as many as 7,000 retired gerenals and admirals) when there is no evidence that they have credited similar insider criticism of their own business, say from Bernard Goldberg, John Stossel and Michael Medved to name just three MSM-insiders turned MSM critics.

My news judgement tells me this is a popular story with the media only because they hate Rumsfeld (and the feeling is apparently mutual) and a perfect example of how the liberal media monoculture distorts not just the story, but story placement as well. Of course, I don’t bother with Broder and Dionne because (1) I already know their take on any given subject, and (2) it lacks depth and undertanding.

Tags:

For Us But Not You

One of the things I dislike the press for is the way they hound people who have suffered a profound emotional experience – the loss of a child, displaced by a natural disaster, victim of a terrible crime. David Gelernter wrote eloquently about the hounding in his book Drawing Life. And when called on it, they always tell us not to shoot the messenger, they have no choice because it’s what the public wants.

Jill Carroll came home from being kidnapped in Iraq, and after a couple of brief statements the press has respected her request to respect her privacy. What about the clamoring of the public that must be obeyed? I guess that can be ignored for a fellow member of the press. Too bad they excercise such restraint for other people.

Unity Takes Time

Cori doesn’t seem to think that it’s right for a columnist at the paper to break news while the reporters sit on their hands. Don’t read the St. Louis Post-Dispatch then, where columnists routinely break news that their reporters show little interest or ability to cover.

But what’s more important is what’s actually reported — the progress in the talks between the political parties in Iraq to forge a government:

The political agreements are fragile, and they will be blown away if the factions can’t form a government soon to put them in practice. Meanwhile, beyond the Green Zone, Iraqis are still being slaughtered every day in the streets. But given where Iraq was six months ago — when Sunni and Shiite leaders were barely talking — their agreement on the framework for a unity government is important. These negotiations may not succeed, but they are not a fairy-tale fantasy, as some critics argue.

We Americans are an impatient lot. From my meagre experiences abroad, time takes on a different meaning once you leave the country.

I’m wondering if that chick at the AP will take Mr. Ignatius to task for the “as some critics argue” line. OK, that was a rhetorical device because I’m not wondering at all, since she didn’t note that President Bush was following the lead of the reporting about him which is routinely larded up with “some critics claim” constructions without ever naming the critics.

Tags:

Couric Jumps Ship

Katie Couric is leaving NBC’s Today show to anchor the CBS evening news and take part in 60 minutes. As Rachel at TinkertyTonk notes “I cannot remember the last time I watched the network evening news. Can you?” Ah, no, I can’t. And the next question would be when did I last watch the evening news and not notice their bias?

The NYT article gets the salient fact right here: “The evening newscasts have for some time been programs in decline at all three networks, with audiences that have grown markedly older.” I do clearly remember the parade of denture, medicare supplement, and adult diaper ads last time I watched even though I couldn’t tell you when that was. So great, a women gets to helm the nightly newscast when pretty much nobody cares.

Tags:

Breast Asymmetry Linked to Cancer

In a study with 504 women, researchers at the University of Liverpool led by Dr. Diane Scutt found that a difference in breast size was linked to an increased risk of cancer in a fairly linear way, with every 100 milliliters of difference equating to an increase in the risk of cancer of 50 percent. The average breast size is approximately 500 milliliters, so we’re talking fairly sizable differences here.

You can tell the caliber of the news organization by the headline (and photo) they chose to run with this subject:

BBC: “Uneven breasts linked to cancer”

Daily Mail: “Uneven breasts may increase cancer risk”

Xinhua: “Breast asymmetry may increase cancer risk in women”

Atlanta Constitution Journal: “Asymmetrical Breasts May Raise Cancer Risk”

Elites TV: “Study: Breast Size Matters When It Comes To Cancer”

Glasgow Daily Record: “MATCHING BREASTS ARE BEST”

The Sun (UK): “Lopsided boob risk”

Missing the Real Story

One of the things that burns me up about the coverage of Saddam’s trial is that it focuses on the wrong two things and ignores it’s only point. It focuses on what he or his lawyers did in court, but not the testimony. Witnesses come in and describe the horrors he perpetrated – hardly a mention of the contents of their testimony. Saddam stands up and blusters – full coverage. And the other question that consumes the press is Saddam getting a fair trial. Personally, the fact that he’s getting a trial at all is all the fairness he deserves (yes, I’m aware of the proceedural arguments for the need for a “fair” trial) and the whole point of the trial is for the fullness of his crimes to come out and that he be given a chance to answer for them.

But that isn’t what we get. Is this how the truth and reconciliation commission in South Africa was covered?

Tags:

A Network Moment

I was complaining about the news media the other day at work. I started with the local newspaper, the Post-Dispatch. I was relating that I had to disregard any item in it that was “news” because the high likelyhood of its inaccuracy. I was told there were other sources of news. I then said TV news wasn’t any better and that cable news focused far too much on sensational but trivial stories (yes, even Fox). Just get your news from the internet I was told. The trouble is that even on the internet most of the primary sources are the very same news organizations that have been misinforming me for years and show no inclination to stop. You have to check everything against primary sources, which is a time consuming pain in the rear.

What I want is a reliable newspaper I can read in the morning. I love the idea behind them, it’s just the execution that stinks. I want to be able to flip on the TV and be informed by accurate and relevant reporting. This current passing off opinion as fact just drives me nuts, and does so because I care about the news. If I were indifferent, I wouldn’t care that the press can’t do its job.

In other words, I’m having what he’s having:

I want to be able to read the New York Times or watch CNN, or listen to NPR and be able to trust what they’re telling me. Since I can’t do that, since the media is no longer fulfilling their basic function, I have to blog, and I have to read blogs. It pisses me off, because I had better things to do this decade than be my own news service. I don’t like having to read transcripts of press conferences because I can’t trust the media to even write down what was said correctly. I don’t like having to spend hours finding real experts on the web to analyze how this or that media expert has distorted the facts. I don’t like having to pore through the blogs of journalists, soldiers and Iraqi citizens so I can get some inkling of how things are really going, without the hype. Even though I do it, I don’t even like having to download the Brookings report once/month in order to see what the numbers say about how the war is going.But I have to do all that, because its the only way I can truly be an informed citizen.

Is that really too much to ask for?

And I feel this anger too:

But I[m pretty sure the message behind “The Unit” wasn’t that the press is the cause of global terrorism. I haven’t watched the show or anything, but I’m just guessing that the message is that terrorists are the cause of global terrorism. Not American foreign policy, not economic inequity, not religious oppression, but terrorists themselves. You know, the killy, murdery, explodey kind.That’s a nuance that’s lost on the Express’ Chris Mincher, though. “The enemies are nothing more than terrorist caricatures with beards and guns,” he writes. “Their goal: killing. Their purpose: to be shot. Their motivation: unknown.”

Maybe Chris longs for a TV show or movie that personalizes terrorists, that tells their story, that makes us empathize with them and think that maybe they’re just not that bad after all.

Sometimes a bad guy really is just a bad guy.

Questions Easy, Answers Hard

Is it just me, or does Larry O’Donnell sound like he had a few too many before going on the air with Hugh Hewitt? Actually, Larry always sounds like he’s had a few too many and isn’t a happy drunk.

What about the ambulence attendents? Would they be in on the cover up, too? Maybe an intrepid reporter can track them down and get their story.

Here is another example where reality will divurge between left and right; it will become an article of faith on the left that Cheney was drunk when he shot Mr. Wittington, and it will become an article of faith on the right that he wasn’t. And I’m not one of those people who like to split truth down the middle, either Cheney was or he wasn’t and so one group is quite simply wrong.

Tags:

I Love To Laugh

I cannot tell a lie – I’m simply filled with glee at thought of the Scooter Libby trial. At this point, I don’t care if Scooter is convicted or acquited, if he wrongly is set free or wrong is convicted — what I want is the press to get what’s coming to them. I neither know nor care about the guilt or innocence of Scooter — but I want to see the press pay for the crimes they’ve committed against the truth all this time. Yes, I understand that nobody from the fourth estate will be fined, let alone jailed, but just having to go into court and be exposed to the best disinfectant, sunshine to quote the St. Louis Post Dispatch editorialist (not plagiarize, since the Post editorial page no longer recognizes plagiarism).

Libby was indicted because his testimony didn’t agree with three reporters. So what else can his defense be but that he was telling the truth or at worse made a simple but unintentional mistake of recall based on what everybody actually knew at the time?

And the benefits are limited to just the people who are called to testify – the disappointment of those who aren’t might be palpable, as they too might be exposed like everyones unfavorite, David Gregory:

I’ll bet that the Libby defense team will want to chat with more than just Ms. Mitchell. That said, we should note that David Gregory may really be out of the loop – he chimed in with this:

GREGORY: And it is interesting–it’s also interesting, I should just point out, that nobody called me at any point, which is unfortunately…
WILLIAMS: Apparently not.
GREGORY: …not the point.
RUSSERT: Does anybody ever?
GREGORY: But I just wanted to note that.
RUSSERT: I’ve been meaning to talk to you about that.

Stand tall, Stretch – you may be the last man standing if Russert, Mitchell and Williams have a ghastly experience at the Libby trial.

Yes, that is the unmistakable stylings of Tom Maguire. I’m standing on the shoulders of giants today.

Tags: , , ,