Man bites newspaper- newspaper problems traced to Richard Nixon (Dinosaur Media DeathWatch™)

Boston Phoenix ^ | April 14, 2009 | Steven Stark

[abb]

It's not news that newspapers are in huge trouble — victims of technological change and a mini-depression. What is news is the unadorned glee that is greeting the demise of newsprint.

When auto or city workers lose their jobs, there's talk of bailouts and extra measures to cushion the trauma, and even mournful country songs written in tribute. And when newspapers close? The blogs are full of self-congratulations at the demise of the journalistic establishment.

"Seeing newspapers fall apart brings me joy," writes an anonymous essayist in a broadside reprinted on the blog Reflections of a Newsosaur. Then there was the throng of commentators on boston.com that rejoiced over news the Boston Globe might close.

Part of this sour reaction is due to the traditional American love of any new futuristic innovation or technology. The past be damned! But a large part of it can be traced back more than 30 years to Richard Nixon. It was he who made hatred of the mainstream press fashionable, and his administration's cultural legacy continues to this day.

Of course, Nixon and his aides weren't the first Oval Office denizens to complain about the press; nor was he the first to accuse journalists of bias. Abraham Lincoln beat him to that punch when he closed border newspapers during the Civil War on the grounds they were too pro-Southern.

And, as it turns out, Nixon later had good reason to loathe the press, since he was eventually dislodged from office in the Watergate scandal in large part because of the solid investigative work of the fourth estate.

But it was Vice-President Spiro Agnew who actually delivered the tirade in 1969 (and who also later left office in disgrace) that launched millions of press haters. In a speech supposedly written by Pat Buchanan, Agnew attacked a "small band of network commentators" who, he charged, were a "tiny and closed fraternity of privileged men, elected by no one." Because of what he called their dedication to the "endless pursuit of controversy," he called on the networks to be "more responsive to the views of the nation and more responsible to the people they serve."

Note that Agnew was specifically attacking the networks — whose licenses come from the government — and not the press as a whole, at least in that speech. Nevertheless, his remarks struck a chord — as did the Nixon administration's continual campaign against "the media" — a term it popularized because it felt "the media" sounded far colder and more distant than "the press."

It wasn't long before the whole conservative movement had taken up the cry that the media establishment was biased against its cause and, by implication, the concerns of Middle America. Whereas liberal populism had once railed against financial titans, conservative populism now targeted editors, publishers, and reporters (among others) as the new dangerous elite.

Entire organizations were formed to document liberal media bias. A book on the "liberal slant" of news coverage was often an instant ticket to the bestseller list. And, in the subsequent decades, whether in the hands of Rush Limbaugh (who, without any trace of irony, relentlessly attacked the "drive-by media") or with the rise of Fox News — which claimed to be objective in comparison to virtually everyone else — the movement grew. By 2004, the conservative Club for Growth could attack Democratic candidate (and later party head) Howard Dean by telling him to take his "tax-hiking, government-expanding, latte-drinking, sushi-eating, Volvo-driving, New York Times-reading, body-piercing, Hollywood-loving, left-wing freak show back to Vermont, where it belongs." (emphasis added) And everyone knew what the reference to the Times meant.

One of the great "successes" of the modern conservative movement has been the extent to which it has discredited and delegitimized mainstream journalism. So, the next time a reporter loses his or her job, you can go ahead and credit (or blame) the Internet and the economy. But without the legacy of Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew, the history and future of American journalism might be very different.

[abb]

Still hating on Nixon...

[abb]

ping

[Kansas58]

How about we get someone in Congress to propose a TAX!

A TAX on NEWSPRINT!

Whereas the production of newspapers causes trees to be cut down, hauled by polluting trucks to polluting paper mills, and hauled from paper mills to publishers and

Whereas the production of newspapers requires toxic ink and solvents and energy wasting machinery and

Whereas the distribution of newspapers requires the use of dirty internal combustion engines and

Whereas a large portion of every landfill is used for discarded newspapers,

Therefore:

Be it resolved that a Newsprint tax, of $1,000.00 per pound, be charged to EVERY newspaper with a daily subscription, within the United States!
________________________________________
We should get some Republican to propose THIS as an amendment to any “cap and trade” or “carbon tax” proposal that comes up!
Maybe we can make it like “Cap and Trade” and use the revenue generated, from this tax on dirty dinosaur newspapers, to subsidize a tax credit for home computers and digital devices?
Or, we could use the money to subsidize talk radio! Well, those guys really don’t need any help!

[GOP_Raider]

Abraham Lincoln beat him to that punch when he closed border newspapers during the Civil War on the grounds they were too pro-Southern.

Excellent, this could start a 1,000 post long CW thread!

[GeronL]

lol.

thats gonna save them?

[papasmurf]

You’re dead wrong. It was not Nixon who made famous the hatred of the press. It IS the newsmedia themselves.

De Nile is a river, dude, get over it, and get a real job.

[a fool in paradise]

It was he who made hatred of the mainstream press fashionable,

BULLSTALIN.

There was massive outrage at how the MSM handled themselves in covering the 1968 DNC riots (the media sided with the dissenters inside the convention and outside in the streets).

[mmichaels1970]

Bush's Nixon's fault.

[abb]

And LBJ wasn’t on good terms with them toward the end of his Presidency. They turned on him like a pack of dogs.

[donna]

OR, Steven, it could be that “mainstream journalism” hates and denigrates everything that I love:

God, family and country.

[norwaypinesavage]

They cry a lot when you poke them, don’t they?

[a fool in paradise]

The Houston Chronicle probably went easy on him, even then. Johnson held a blackmail letter. He’d secured an agreement for positive press in exchange for permitting a bank merger to go through.

It was revealed in the 1990s when people finally got to go over LBJ’s tapes (Kennedy installed the White House taping sysem, LBJ expanded it, and the press did not discuss it until Nixon got caught on tape...).

[Huskrrrr]

But without the legacy of Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew, the history and future of American journalism might be very different.

Grasping at straws instead of looking at the real cause and effects. The vast majority of daily publications endorse the vast majority of Democrat candidates each election cycle. This was not always the case. The media have shited so far to the left in the last 30 years, while the average citizen has not. I'm reminded of the David Copperfield magic stunt: making the Statue of Liberty “disappear" before the camera and live audience. Of course what really happened was the stage and audience revolved 180 degrees, out of view of the statue. Everyone’s perception was that the statue disappeared , but the reality was their perspective had shifted.

[Spok]

In a way, they’re right. The downward spiral of the MSM began when they decided to use the power of the media to pursue a political agenda. It’s the same problem politicians have; how do mere mortals wield power in a fair and equitable manner and resist the temptation of exploiting it for personal gain or the promotion of personal beliefs. If history teaches us anything, it’s that the less power is concentrated in one place, the better off we all are.

[RexBeach]

The most obnoxious SOBs in these United States are print reporters.

They are snakes, and would sell relatives into slavery for a scoop.

The reporters made the nation loathe them, not Mr. Nixon.

I find it ironic that this piece is found in “The Boston Phoenix.” If ever there was a rag, it’s “The Phoenix.”

[a fool in paradise]

They cry a lot when you poke them, don’t they?

They are like slugs. They leave a trail of slime...

[a fool in paradise]

They went after McCarthy and those who pursued stateside Communists.

They went after Tammany Hall corruption.

And we know that Yellow Journalists have sometimes engaged in their trade strictly to sell more papers.

[abb]

A lot of what happened to the Drive-By Media can be traced to Henry Luce (co-founder of Time magazine) leaving the scene in the mid-60s. While he wasn’t conservative to the degree us FReepers are, he was nevertheless a moderating force on the national media scene.

And his influence was vast while he was active.

[Cicero]

Well, no question, Watergate was a transforming event. But not quite like this jerk describes it.

It was the great age of the “investigative reporter.” Ambitious wannabees went into the journalism schools in great numbers, determined to be famous investigative reporters.

But what did they mean by that? Nothing about facts, I’m afraid, because there weren’t a whole lot of facts in the Watergate propaganda campaign. Just headline after headline screaming that Nixon was guilty. Guilty of what? well, that’s never been entirely clear. Guilty of being Nixon, apparently.

What it showed was that political propaganda could beat down even powerful politicians, even bring down a president. No facts necessary, just big headlines and loud talking heads, week after week.

Nixon didn’t start the Vietnam War, he tried to fix it and then end it, after JFK and LBJ screwed it up and left him with a mess. But they managed to pin it on him, and anyone these days who still resents the Vietnam War only remembers that it was Nixon’s fault.

Watergate didn’t give conservatives a political tool. It gave leftists and the media a severe case of hubris or overweaning pride. They thought that nothing could stop them, that they could do anything they wanted, that facts no longer mattered, that they could impose their political visions on the country like it or not. The Columbia School of Journalism was King.

Well, in many ways they were right. They won victories with Carter and Clinton, and now again with Obama. But in the process, they have managed to destroy their own credibility. The right didn’t destroy them; they destroyed themselves.

And they still don’t get it.

[ozzymandus]

I saw another crap story the other day blaming Nixon for our current problems. Must be a DNC talking point.

[RobinOfKingston]

Mr Stark could get a good thumb-nail sketch of why newspapers are failing by simply reading his own article.

[Valpal1]

I think many hate the media because of media behavior and agenda driven reporting. I think the Nixon era was when the media jumped the shark and became so intoxicated with it’s own power that they totally failed to notice the shifting of public attitude toward the press.

When they went after Reagan, they failed miserably because in general the public was damned tired of the press (and we loved Reagan).

The death spiral continues. But hey, they’ve finally noticed their complicity in their own demise. That’s something.

[DManA]

I blame Jefferson:

“The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers.” Thomas Jefferson

[abb]

http://www.adweek.com/aw/content_display/news/agency/e3i89d7632ddc985bd10299b4c00659348d
ZO Revises Ad Spend Forecast Downward

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/196214-Report_TV_Advertising_Expected_To_Fall_5_5_In_09_But_Increase_in_Market_Share.php
Report: TV Advertising Expected To Fall 5.5% In ‘09

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123967358227115677.html
Global Ad Spending Seen Off 6.9%

http://adage.com/cabletv09/article?article_id=135922
Top-Tier Cable Networks Set to Take on Broadcast

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003961946
Earnings Preview: More Gannett Woes Coming in Q1?

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman2/publish/Cable_20/Uncertain_mood_as_cable_upfront_nears.asp
Uncertain mood as cable upfront nears

http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=104016
Trending Up: Nielsen Says Online Video Usage Soars

http://www.slate.com/id/2216028/
The Great Newspaper Crackup of 1918 And what to learn from it.

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/business/20090414_Phila__Newspapers_offer__50M_deal.html
Phila. Newspapers offer $50M deal

http://newsosaur.blogspot.com/
Newspaper web sales lag by every measure

http://www.newspaperdeathwatch.com/
Analysts Foresee Ugly Earnings Season

http://recoveringjournalist.typepad.com/recovering_journalist/
Newspapers Check Out at Marriott

[goat granny]

Decades ago my father was a mounted policeman in Detroit..He knew many reporters. He always said on the ladder of morality, newspaper men were 2 rungs below a pimp. A pimp would sell your mother or your sister, but a newsman would sell his own mother and sister for a story. Pimps didn't sell their own flesh and blood..(this was back in the 50’s.....

[RexBeach]

Wow. Good post. Thanks, gg.

[stinkerpot65]

Steven Stark, a writer, teacher, and consultant,....He has been a commentator for CNN, National Public Radio, and the Voice of America, .... A former aide to Jimmy Carter, .... He is a graduate of Harvard College and Yale Law School.

And therein lies the problem with the press.

[Luke21]

This joker is really in denial.

[Luke21]

It goes way back before that. They slaughtered Joe McCarthy and Barry Goldwater. They first tried to get Nixon in 1952.

[Interesting Times]

It’s somewhat amusing that this “journalist” thinks Nixon was a conservative.

See? We can use scare quotes too.

[abb]

They first tried to get Nixon in 1952.

They never got over Nixon winning the 1950 election for Senator from California by beating Helen Gahagan Douglas.

[bill1952]

One of the great “successes” of the modern conservative movement has been the extent to which it has discredited and delegitimized mainstream journalism.

Ah, Horsesh*t.
The media did that all by itself.
Rotten and dishonest to the core, it's readers have been flying away as it becomes more and more nothing more than the 5th column department for the DNC.

Not even worth wrapping fish in - you just can't get that smell out of your fish.

>But without the legacy of Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew, the history and future of American journalism might be very different.

More BS. I was a democrat then.
Now I am not and I also see how the media has made an unparalleled descent into slanted yellow trash, not even worthy of the legal protections that are afforded to real “news.”

freedom of the press does not mean freedom from the truth

[bert]

the article is pretty much irrelevant. The papers have debilitating disease. If they don’t die, they will be put on support in a hospice.

[abb]

[ConservativeMind]

Well said.

[abb]

http://thephoenix.com/BLOGS/dontquoteme/archive/2009/04/14/globe-union-to-times-co-negotiate-publicly-share-revenue-let-us-talk-with-potential-buyers.aspx
Globe union to Times Co: negotiate publicly, share revenue; let us talk with potential buyers

[a fool in paradise]

Just headline after headline screaming that Nixon was guilty. Guilty of what? well, that’s never been entirely clear.

He was guilty of going after Communists in the 1950s.

[N. Theknow]

But a large part of it can be traced back more than 30 years to Richard Nixon. It was he who made hatred of the mainstream press fashionable,

BS!

My Dad hated the Atlanta Urinal and Constipation, and especially Furman Bisher, long before Nixon.

[N. Theknow]

Dear Steven Stark,

Want to know what is wrong with the news reporting business and newspapers in particular?

Tape a copy of this column to a record and run it backward at 78 RPM and read it.

When you say, "This is bull$hit!" you will have discovered truth.

Hint: It's that way at any speed.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

This was not always the case. The media have shited so far to the left in the last 30 years

If you read Ann Coulter Treason or M. Stanton Evans Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America's Enemies on McCarthy and his treatment by Big Journalism, you will realize that journalism was full-throated leftism fifty and sixty years ago.

Indeed, if you reflect on the fact that according to William Safire, the meaning of the word "liberal" was changed (essentially inverted) during the 1920s and ask yourself who could have had the motive and the opportunity to accomplish that, you will realize that only socialists had the motive ("socialism" having failed as a brand in the U.S.) and only journalists had the opportunity. The inevitable conclusion is that journalists were uniformly socialist back in the 1920s. I wondered for years, even decades, why in the twentieth century journalism claimed to be "objective" but actually was leftist. Whereas the newspapers of the founding era were openly partisan and not uniformly leftist.

Relatively recently I was struck by a blinding flash of the obvious - the newspaper business was transformed by the telegraph and the wire services (mostly the AP) in the second half of the nineteenth century. Journalism which claims objectivity but is actually uniformly leftist seems to trace back to the post-Civil War era with the implications of the transformation of the business model of journalism working out.

The Right to Know

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

It goes way back before that. They slaughtered Joe McCarthy and Barry Goldwater. They first tried to get Nixon in 1952.

Exactly.

[Huskrrrr]

You raise some good points. It seems to me that growing up in the Midwest in the sixties I remember reading the Des Moines Register and other dailies and beleiving that most reporting was based on facts and not just quotes from “anonymous sources”. My government class in eighth grade was a study in the Constitution and the three branches of the federal government. At no time did my teacher let her own personnel political beliefs slip into the lectures. I know this is a little off topic but I seem to remember more objectivity in general back in the sixties, even though much political unrest surrounded all of us.

[hinckley buzzard]

But without the legacy of Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew, the history and future of American journalism might be very different.

I nominate the late President Richard Nixon for a retroactive award as Person of the Decade for the '70s. Who knew...his Legacy lives after him.

[abb]

Take a look at this.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/15/business/media/15brill.html?_r=1&ref=technology
Media Executives Plan Online Service to Charge for Content

http://www.paidcontent.org/entry/419-brill-crovitz-and-hindery-team-up-to-solve-news-cash-woes-with-journali/
Brill, Crovitz, Hindery Launch E-Commerce Venture For News Business

[Milhous]

Agnew attacked a "small band of network commentators" who, he charged, were a "tiny and closed fraternity of privileged men, elected by no one."

Half-wit neglects to mention Agnew's "nattering nabobs of negativism" money quote.

One of the great "successes" of the modern conservative movement has been the extent to which it has discredited and delegitimized mainstream journalism.

That's right baby, you remind everyone that conservatism remains the 800 pound gorilla in the room despite koolaid drinking hallucinations about how "we're all socialist's now."

[abb]

Take a look at this. Back when newspapers tried - and succeeded for a time - shutting up radio news.

The New Orleans Press-Radio War and Huey P. Long, 1922-1936

http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-0711102-133745/unrestricted/Collins_thesis.pdf

[nomad]

Great angle!Push this and drive a finale stake in that ghouls black heart.Turn liberals against themselves.