Are politicians turning us against the media?

Hotline's Wake Up Call ^ | 5-19-05 | Craig Crawford

[Nick Thimmesch]

One Freeper's take on "Attack The Messenger":

"Crawford's a crybaby. Don't publish bogus stories, don't interpret news in a biased manner and no one will attack you. The media acts like it' such a glorious and important thing until someone calls it on its problems then its just a messenger."

Anyone agree/disagree?

[Nick Thimmesch]

Attack The Messenger, How Politicians Turn You Against The Media

[Brilliant]

The media has almost no credibility these days. Of course, they've always been liars. But now people recognize it.

[IncPen]

It would do us well to consider other MSM myths and ask ourselves how long they've been getting away with it

[zip]

These days, the truth is hard to find. If the press is not believed - or believable - because politicians have turned the public against it, then the press it not free and under the thumbs of politicians

Is this clown for real? "the press is not...believable - because politicians have turned the puble against it the public isn't as stupid as the left thinks. How about that correction?

[Patrick1]

What do expect the MSM to say?

[stevio]

Of course, they've always been liars.

And to think my Dad listening to Walter Cronkite saying "And that's the way it is" for all those years, still was a conservative. I give him that much more credit. May he rest in peace.

[Nick Thimmesch]

"The media has almost no credibility these days. Of course, they've always been liars. But now people recognize it."

Well, my late father was what you would call an old time reporter: started out at The Des Moines Register, went to Time Magazine in the 50's/60's and then became a columnist, so I'm very familiar with "the media". I don't believe my father nor his colleagues were "liars", but I do believe that as with any profession, they were human and made mistakes. But not deliberately.

[ctlpdad]

You can hardly deny they try to mold the "news" to suit their views, though.

[Nick Thimmesch]

Well, given that "the truth" tends to be selected "facts", it's almost impossible to not shape a story based on what the writer and their editors consider "the truth". But you have to start somewhere. I believe Crawford's saying in his Attack The Messenger book that politicians are accusing the media of selecting those facts based on bias, when sometimes they are simply reporting facts.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

Not ALL media and journalists are bad, deceptive, Marxist, pro-Islamist.

Bankrupt and starve those that ARE by boycotts, negative-publicity campaigns and antisubscription drives.

And support the good ones--and their sponsors/advertisers and tell them WHY. If you don't tell them WHY, you don't get the bang for your buck that you can.

We must influence future advertising buys much more so than we have to date.

[Nick Thimmesch]

All of this also depends on someone's definition of "the media": certainly a "reporter" is not the same as a "columnist" nor are they the same as a televison/talk radio producer, but somehow we tend to lump them all into one Big Media. These days, there seems to be very few actual "reporters" and plenty of opinionated columnists and producers who do have an agenda, one we can iether agree with or disagree with. So the book Attack The Messenger may mean both -- that is, both legitimate reporters and opinion makers are being mixed together by politicians who have their OWN agenda as well.

I don't know: check it out & tell me!

http://www.attackthemessenger.com/index.html

[zip]

I don't believe my father nor his colleagues were "liars"

Your father could have been an exception BUT wake up and smell the roses. MSM is predominately leftist, antiAmerican, democRatic apologists, voting 87 percent leftist (in the 90 percent range for electronic media types). Again, hopefully your father was an exception.

This is the same as academia, don't try to convince anyone with an iota of intelligence that the majority aren't anti American, anti military, anti moral values etc.

[listenhillary]

Nixon - full bore media attack as they were disgusted he won.
Reagan - Full bore media attack as they were disgusted he won
GW Bush - Full bore foaming at the mouth, peeing in pants, projectile vomiting, dry retching, wild crazed look of an insane drugged wildman media attack as they were outraged, disgusted, depressed, sucidal that he won.

Media bias? What media bias?

[Nick Thimmesch]

By "MSM" I assume you mean Main Stream Media, but as I said, exactly who are the MSM? Would columnists George Will, Robert Novak and Cal Thomas be MSM (they have HUGE readership) or is C-SPAN (which I believe does a great job of being impartial) MSM? In Attack The Messenger, Crawford discusses these differences:

http://www.attackthemessenger.com/index.html

You can see for yourself and decide: I'm open to discussion onf this...

[listenhillary]

http://www.mrc.org/

[Nick Thimmesch]

http://www.mrc.org/

Ain't that Brent Bozo's site?

[zip]

MSM is predominately leftist, antiAmerican, democRatic apologists, voting 87 percent leftist (in the 90 percent range for electronic media types

Note my use of "PREDOMINATELY" which I stand by 100 percent. I can find a few good communists, atheists, democRats, academics, media types, etc but that doesn't make those groups acceptable to me. So when I say MSM is leftist, I mean the GREAT MAJORITY of them with a few exceptions here and there.

[zip]

Excellent post. Thanks

[zip]

Ain't that Brent Bozo's site?

OMG, a conservative's site. (Oh woe is me. Alas, alack. How can I go on?) Why are you on a conservative, pro America site? You would be better served by DU.

[chudogg]

George Will is dry, boring, and brings nothing forward in a serious intellectual discussion. Thus a great candidate for a token conservative guest columnist for our nations leading newspapers.

Robert Novak is all of the above but he has the honor being a Bush bashing conservative, even better for our MSM to give credence to.

Now Cal Thomas is probably good model for conservative punditry.

And were you serious by mentioning C-SPAN as benefiting conservatism? I think a channel running the Emergency Broadcasting System at 2 in the morning gets better ratings. And how would one even go about incorporating leftist bias into non-narative video feeds of Senate/House committees and then airing calls from viewers from Repub, Dem, and Indepedent one at a time??

Your website has absolutely no information on the content of the book, so i have no idea what "facts" it uses as to what makes the media impartial. But judging from the topics listed, it isnt pretty.

[Paul_Denton]

The MSM has always been treasonous. From Douglas MacArthur to the Tet offensive to the See-BS scandel to Newsweak more recently. They will do anything to get more of our troops killed.

[Nick Thimmesch]

"Why are you on a conservative, pro America site? You would be better served by DU."

Huh? Have you replaced Jimbo as System Administrator, or just trying to chase people off what I guess you consider to be YOUR site: I'll match my real conservative credentials with you any day of the week pal. All I did was make funny about Brent's last name: nothing he ain't heard before I'm sure.

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n415/a02.html?63488

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n412/a06.html?63488

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v04/n468/a07.html?63488

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n639/a13.html?63488

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v05/n799/a02.html?63488


Now: what are you saying, otherwise?

[section9]

Silly rabbit, you're just trying to peddle the lie that the partisan media is impartial.

In fact, the elite media (terms: the NYT, the Post, the LAT, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, and possibly NPR) is an instrument of agitation and propaganda for the Democratic Party. Period. You cite a few token conservatives. That proves nothing. When 85 to 90 percent of the journalistic community votes for Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and John Kerry, I know where their political leanings are.

Let's face it, CBS deliberately and with malice aforethought attempted to swing the election to John Kerry with fraudulent documents last year. Now, Newsweek is trying to damage the Administration with an unsourced story about Koran desecration.

These outlets do this because they are have a predisposition to criticize all things Republican, Conservative, and military.

Please don't try to snow the snowman.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[zip]

All I did was make funny about Brent's last name

Right, that was hilarious. Dissing a good man sure is funny alright, I just missed the humor in putting someone down.

[rcocean]

I'll attack the messanger. Crawford is not a objective professional journalist. Like George Stephonopolos, Chris Matthews, and Bill Moyers he is a former LIBERAL DEMOCRAT POLITICO turned "Journalist".

Here is Craig Crawford's background:

"Crawford arrived in Washington in 1989 as a reporter for the Orlando Sentinel. He was the newspaper’s Washington bureau chief from 1989 to 1997. Before becoming a journalist, he served in 1984 as the Alabama State Field Director for the John Glenn presidential primary campaign, and the Georgia State Field Director for the Mondale/Ferraro general election campaign.

He practiced law in Orlando until 1984 and, although no longer practicing, is still a licensed attorney in the Florida Bar.

Crawford’s first experience in Washington began as a high school student, when he served as a page in the U.S. Senate during the Watergate scandal. Later, while a college student, he worked as a staffer in the White House Press Office during President Jimmy Carter’s Administration."