Twilight of the Press Gods ( Will Swift Vets Story Bring Down Lib Media, As Well As Kerry...?)

The American Thinker ^ | 8/14/04 | Thomas Lifson

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

The genie is out of the bottle. The best efforts of the mainstream media to blockade the story of Kerry’s lies about Cambodia, and the charges by the vast majority of men who served with him in the Swift Boat operations, have failed. Glenn Reynolds  prints a telling letter from a reader who requests anonymity. Read the entire entry, but here are the key sentences:

...last night I was talking to a friend who is a hardcore liberal Democrat and is, in fact, a first cousin of a very well-known Democratic Senator. He was very upset about the Kerry-Swift Vet-Cambodia controversy. He blamed Kerry for the whole thing, saying he had set himself up for this problem by making Vietnam the centerpiece of his campaign. Two things struck me about this. First, this is a guy who gets all of his news from the biggies - the NYT, NPR, and CNN - and yet he knew all about the story. That means the Big Media filter isn't preventing the story from reaching people. Second, he had concluded that Kerry deserves the criticism and is lacking in credibility. This is a guy who, if there were any yes-but talking points in defense of Kerry, surely would have stuck to them. This says to me that if Big Media is in the tank for Kerry, they may actually have hurt him by not covering this story. They've abdicated coverage of a story that is negative to Kerry to the Blogosphere, thus resulting in more damage to their favored candidate than if they'd reported on the story, but with an eye toward knocking it down. They can pretend the story isn't there, but they can't make blogs go away.

Glenn adds:

...they're damaging themselves as more and more people notice that they're ignoring it.Just so. Credibility, once lost, is difficult to re-establish. Ask Bill Clinton.

In April, I used the metaphor of a driver stuck in snow, who presses the accelerator, and finds the spinning wheels only melting more snow, making traction all the more difficult. The current efforts of the press to define Kerry’s lies as a non-event are destroying their own traction. The media eruption over far less serious charges about Bush’s National Guard service is too fresh in the recesses of most peoples’ minds. And, of course, Bush didn’t choose to run for re-election on the basis of his honorable, even brave service as a jet jockey, a highly dangerous occupation.

But it is summer now. So let me switch metaphors. The establishment press is facing its Gottedamerung – the twilight of the gods. For decades, god-like figures handed down their version of the truth from corporate Valhallas like the New York Times and CBS News. The public credulously accepted their writ on what is important and what is not important.

But god-like pretensions are dangerous, indeed, often fatal. Especially when combined with mono-maniacal convictions on the need for their point of view to prevail.  Post-modernity, a concept beloved of the bien pensants, cuts two ways. The public is skeptical of anyone who pretends to be an authoritative gatekeeper of knowledge. Kerry, who has never cut much of a figure as a genuine, warm, empathetic human being, is an ideal target for citizen skepticism.

The establishment press is coming across as every bit as pompous and conniving as the man who married two centi-millionaire heiresses.

They are, in fact, destroying themselves. Their industry is in serious trouble. Circulation scandals have hit major newspaper publishers, while the scandal-free press can take little comfort in their declining readership. Network TV news is a shadow of its former self, and its future is very limited. CNN’s monopoly is shattered, and it boasts a poor fraction of the viewership of Fox News, the only cable news outlet fully covering Kerrygate with the same seriousness accorded Bush’s National Guard service questions.

The blogosphere is the camel whose nose, and now a good part of its neck, is under the tent. Leadership in coverage of the self-destruction of the Kerry Campaign is in the hands of Instapundit, Hugh Hewitt (guru to many of us), Powerline, Captain’s Quarters, Just One Minute, and many other bloggers.

Nobody had ever heard of Bob Woodward until Watergate. Afterward, he became a powerful brand name, and his and Bernstein's work inspired generations of new journalists. The same phenomenon is taking place today, and journalism will never be the same again. The big difference is that this time around, there is a technological revolution compounding the destructive force operating on the old media. Hurricane Charley has nothing on the winds of change now blowing away the old media practices and economics.

Future historians are going to find this election deeply significant for not just War on Terror policy reasons. This is a transformative election for the structure of political information.

[sweetliberty]

" He also said that they had been "overwhelmed" at the inquiries about "Unfit For Command"!

Wonder how many bookstores nationwide will set up a nearly door-blocking display like they do for Clinton books and Bush bashing books. I'm betting I could probably count them on one hand.

[sweetliberty]

"what's left for Kerry supporters to hang on to???"

He's not Bush.

[Nick Danger]

If (when) the polls show he is sure to lose, Kerry can either resign from the race...

He has to have some reason better than, "It looks like I'm going to lose." Americans will not forgive quitting in that situation. You play until the clock runs out, even if you're down 35-0 in the fourth quarter. Walking off the field, saying, "Well, it's obvious we're going to lose," is not Acceptable American Behavior. Whoever took Kerry's place would get slaughtered.

Kerry is not Toricelli. No one is suggesting he's a crook. He's not about to get indicted. He appears to have a character flaw that makes him want to exaggerate his importance and his accomplishments. Well, so did Al (Love Story, Internet) Gore, and Gore damn near won.

Kerry will tough this out with his "band of brothers," insisting all the while that he did so earn those medals, and he was so on a double-secret mission to Cambodia. Enough people will believe him that he'll think it's working.

I don't think the polls will ever show that big a spread. There is a basic floor under any Democrat that's about 38-42% of the vote. A dead guy could get that. Mondale, Dukakis, and Clinton all got 42%. Kerry will get 42%. Toss in Nader and the undecideds, and the worst it ever looks in the polls is something like 50-42 in favor of Bush. Being down 50-42 in the fourth quarter is not a reason to quit, and Americans won't buy it if the Democrats try it.

[WarrenC]

He went into clinical reasons as to why he thought kerry was unstable...

Could you give an example or two?

[sweetliberty]

Remember back just after 9/11 how many vets were saying they wish they could return to service and fight the war on terror? Maybe this is their way of doing it. Most of them undoubtedly realize that a John Kerry presidency would go against everything they fought and sacrificed for. I expect that they are doing this, not as a political ploy, but out of a sense of duty. They are in a unique position to divert a national political disaster.

[wyattearp]

"I must have missed it, what law is it that says he can not quit?"

Why in the world would he quit? He has no reason to quit! Even if he is losing, he has no reason to quit. If he loses, he retains his Senate seat. He has absolutely no reason to quit! None whatsoever. He has been wanting this for 35 years. He has an ego that wont let him quit.

He is on the ballot in 50 states. If he did quit, there is no mechanism to put somebody else on the dem ballot. Neither hillary nor anybody else can get on the ballot for the dems. It's Kerry and Edwards on the dem ticket. Period. That's it!

What is so ##%^@$#% difficult about this for people to understand? Doesn't anybody comprehend the election process anymore?

[sweetliberty]

"He has to have some reason better than, "It looks like I'm going to lose." Americans will not forgive quitting in that situation."

Worked for Torricelli/Lautenberg. Yeah, I know it's different, but the principle is the same. It's not like they put a high value on playing by the rules.

[CyberAnt]

I beg to differ.

A polster has been asking independents in swing states who have seen the commercial if they are swayed away from voting for Kerry .. 27% say yes.

As for liberals owning 60% of the voters .. try 37-39% are Bush-haters .. not 60%

That is an awesome number for only 1 week.

And .. the book is #1 at Amazon and Barnes & Noble. You can't get those numbers if nobody is paying attention.

And .. HAVE YOU HEARD ANOTHER WORD OUT OF McCAIN .. I didn't think so.

[Betaille]

"As for liberals owning 60% of the voters .. try 37-39% are Bush-haters"
My point was that 60% get their news from Liberal media. Not that 60% hate bush(I would bet that less than 30% actually hate bush). It's very hard to break through the CBSNBCABC Left-wing firewall.

[CyberAnt]

I heard Rush say this, and he said he got his information from some very well-known media people who were at the meeting. My take on what Rush said was that some of the leading MSM people are reading the data and some have read the book and they are starting to say this does not look good for Kerry.

The longer they deny this is a true story .. the more damage they will do to Kerry and to themselves. I agree with the author that this could have a huge impact on the MSM's credibility. We found out after the fact about the Clinton stuff the MSM hid .. the public is not going to allow them to get away with it a second time.

[CyberAnt]

"only time this will come to the fore is if Kerry is elected"

No way! The public let the MSM get away with this garbage with x42, but they won't let it happen again.

[WHBates]

BS, I don't know if most people care but they do know. It may not make a difference but at least, I believe, they are being heard. I just wish that people cared a little more.

[Kackikat]

AND although it may be years down the road, we must prepare for the day when the internet is no longer a venue of Free Speech....the UN may someday control what is said on the internet....we had better have another way to communicate.

[Free Trapper]

I've only spent a very little time on liberal websites to get an idea what they're like.

Why don't those sites and blogs have the same power that the Conservative sites and blogs have?

Is it because they repeat what the alphabet networks put out or because their lies are so apparent???

[CyberAnt]

Hmmmm? Maybe an intern in Australia ..??

[CyberAnt]

What point ..?? McCain made one statement and it's being hearalded as the second coming .. however .. has anybody heard McCain say another word about it ..?? NO!!

Get a clue .. this is not being portrayed as a Bush smear by anybody but the Bush-haters. So what else is new .. these people are blaming him and Jeb for the hurricane.

[CIB-173RDABN]

What is so ##%^@$#% difficult about this for people to understand? Doesn't anybody comprehend the election process anymore?M/i>

---

Chill Wyatt, this thread is like fantasy football league.

The orginal question I responded to was why is Kerry acting so irrational?

I offered an opinion that it was a set up by Hillary.

What has happened in the past 50 years in this nations polictical history would lead anyone to believe the most Liberal Senatator with a long history of being anti-military, at at time of war had a chance to win an election to become President?

First, Senators have a poor record of going from the Senate to the White House.

Second, Liberals at least have to pretend they are in the middle to have a chance (Kerry has done little to move from the left wing to the center).

Kerry's action upon returning from Viet Nam cleans the slate on any good will he would have gained by brief service in combat.

After twenty years in the Senate, there is little he can point to show his leadership.

Shall I go on. The question is, how did he get to the posisition he is in now, what deals were made, and who benefits. These are all legitimate questions, unless you believe the leadership of the Democratic party has absolutely no say on who becomes their nominee (yes I know there are primaries, but there are ways to help and hinder candidates).

Who is going to force him to quit, certainly not Republicans. And if it wasn't for the recent history of the Democratic party to do whatever it takes to win, I would not consider it possible either, but I don't rule anything out when it comes to the Democrats.

However, having said all of that I believe it is all moot now.

The war (peace) in Iraq is not gong as badly as the Democrats would have hoped.

The economy is on the upswing.

There are no scandals within this White House.

People like President Bush.

He has not got down into the gutter with the Democrats and so it is difficult for the opposition to make their lies stick.

---

So as they say, the best laid plans of mice and men sometimes go astray.

Hillary has accomplished one thing. When this campaign is over, there will not be a strong candidate waiting in the wings for 2008 comeback.

If you have not noticed, hillary is slowly moving herself to the center. Can you say 2008?

[jmstein7]

BUMP!