Posted on 01/01/2017 7:24:27 PM PST by ProgressingAmerica
I tell you, Lippmann's book Public Opinion is the gift that keeps on giving. This little narrative from his book is incredible, it explains so much in regard to the symbiosis that exists between progressive journalists and their masters at city hall. On page 338, Lippmann describes an important aspect of how journalists "collect news":
Newspapers do not try to keep an eye on all mankind. They have watchers stationed at certain places, like Police Headquarters, the Coroner's Office, the County Clerk's Office, City Hall, the White House, the Senate, House of Representatives, and so forth. They watch, or rather in the majority of cases they belong to associations which employ men who watch a comparatively small number of places where it is made known when the life of anyone ...... departs from ordinary paths or when events worth telling about occur."
Amazing. So in many cases, the journalist is not actually the first to discover. Someone else is getting the news, and the journalists simply regurgitate it. Particularly that which is government focused.
Go ahead, turn on your TV tonight and watch the nightly news. Have you ever noticed how city hall-focused the local coverage is? I mean, it comes in waves depending on the items covered. It might be police HQ-centered, or courthouse-focused, or etc. Even when there is a story of corruption - it's never that big government is bad, no no! It's just that one guy, this one guy, he is the problem. He or she is the corrupt one. The machinery of government is never actually hurtful or coercive no sir. We need more government, in fact.
...
Without even knowing it, Lippmann is admitting to a gross, gross conflict of interest here. For the last century, journalists have seen it as their role to "take on" this or that big corporation, but do you see Lippmann saying that reporters are stationed at each big corporation's headquarters? No, of course not, nor should they be. So what is the end result of this?
Journalists know the people at city hall personally. Journalists know the people at the white house personally. Journalists know the people in the Senate, the House of Representatives, etc., etc., etc. Culturally, this is actually quite profound because the converse, the big corporation, becomes an alien. They are the enemy.
So first, not only is government providing news stories on a silver platter to their good friends the journalists(and it's probably not a fully accurate story to begin with; it's probably spun in a pro-government way before being passed off), but secondly, all of the journalists' good friends are in positions of government, and those corporate guys are as alien and evil as their politician friends describe them to be. They're all great friends, they're all yukking it up, at our expense.
It is for this reason, that the journalist pool should be permanently kicked out of the White House and congress, the White House Correspondents Association should be abolished, as should the White House Press Room. All of the above, and similar items, are massive conflicts of interest.
That's not to say that they shouldn't be allowed in. Of course they should be allowed in, provided there is current news to cover. Then, get out.
Currently all they do in there is fester and coalesce and plot and scheme. This is a great example of the very kind of intrigue that the Founders wanted to protect us from. The White House Press Room is a form of intrigue.
Because it is quite well known that how the progressive journalists and progressive politicians use these cocktail parties, is as a weapon. Oh, you want to propose a bill that would cut some spending? You're not one of the cool kids. Oh, you want to abolish a department? You're putting Bob over there out of work.
So the uncool kids get laughed out of the party and are not welcome. A blatant conflict of interest. Also, see Alinsky rule #5: Ridicule.
That's only true if the corruption is with a Democrat, who won't even get their party affiliation mentioned, if it's a Republican, it's made to look as the whole party is corrupt.
Traitors of a feather...
A reputable media outlet would have "term limits" for journalists stationed with government offices.
Thanks for posting.
ping
Thanks for the ping, PG.The Democrats have operated on pure chutzpah, counting on “objective” (no chutzpah there) journalism to induce the public to accept the unacceptable. Donald Trump has thus far out-chutzpahed Hillary and “objective” journalism.
People who work at journalism full time ought to be able to do a better job of it than people for whom it is a hobby. But that's not going to happen as long as we "professional" journalists ignore stories we don't like and try to hide our mistakes. We think of ourselves as "gatekeepers.” But there is not much future in being a gatekeeper when the walls are down. — Jack KellyIt appears that DJT predicates his presidency on that prediction. It could get messy; it has already been messy, with that audiotape of Trump’s “private” (until then) conversation about gold diggers.As Rush put it, “this is what it looks like” when a Republican stands up to the Democrats' chutzpah. We “can’t spare the man; he fights.” When things get tough, that is what we will fall back on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.