Posted on 11/13/2004 6:26:15 PM PST by CHARLITE
As amazing as it might seem, a retired correspondent for CBS News recently wrote an op-ed for his previous employer wherein he suggested that the worst news coverage of an election in history was likely performed by America’s bloggers this past November 2.
''As a retired mainstream media ('MSM') journalist--and thus a double-dinosaur--I don’t begrudge these knights of the blog-table their grandiose dreams. But I worked on a school paper when I was a kid and I owned a CB radio when I lived in Texas. And what I saw in the blogosphere on Nov. 2 was more reminiscent of that school paper or a ''Breaker, breaker 19'' gabfest on CB than anything approaching journalism.''
Now, before delving any further into this ranting, you might be interested in knowing who the source of this drivel is. For those who have forgotten, Eric Engberg is the former CBS News correspondent at the heart of Bernard Goldberg’s op-ed in the Wall Street Journal back in 1996 that eventually led to Mr. Goldberg leaving CBS and, subsequently, writing the book, ''Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News.''
To refresh everybody’s memory, in February of 1996, Mr. Engberg was interviewing Steve Forbes on a CBS Evening News segment called, ''Reality Check.'' Mr. Forbes at the time was running for president, and advocating a flat tax. In an apparent effort to discredit Mr. Forbes, Mr. Engberg used extraordinarily inflammatory words like ''wacky,'' ''scheme,'' and ''elixir'' to describe the candidate’s fiscal plan. Additionally, Mr. Engberg had cut-ins of three different liberal economists’ opinions of this tax proposal without the balance of a conservative viewpoint while-- apparently counter to the edicts of his bosses--never identifying their political leanings.
Mr. Goldberg was so angered by what he perceived to be intentional distortions in this ''hatchet job'' that he wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal a few days later wherein he specifically used this incident as evidence of a liberal bias at CBS News:
Which brings us to a recent ''Reality Check'' on the CBS Evening News, reported by Eric Engberg, a longtime friend. His subject was Steve Forbes's flat tax. It's not just Democrats and some Republican presidential candidates who don't like the flat tax--it's also a lot of big-time reporters. The flat tax rubs them the wrong way. Which is fair enough--until their bias makes its way into their reporting. And Mr. Engberg's report set new standards for bias.
This was certainly not the first time that Engberg was accused of bias in his reporting. In fact, the Media Research Center lists Engberg as being part of The Starting Line-up of the Pro-Clinton Press Corps. They actually have a whole page at their website dedicated to some of his most scandalous reports during that era. There is also a similar appraisal of his apparent biases dating back some years previous outlined in a MediaWatch column from 1989 that refers to Mr. Engberg as ''The Spin Doctor of CBS.'' In this piece, all of Engberg’s reports from July 1, 1988 through June 30, 1989 were scrutinized producing some rather shocking findings.
Given this history of ignominy, we shouldn’t be at all surprised that a few years off to play golf and save money at early-bird specials has in no ascertainable fashion altered Mr. Engberg’s modus operandi. Hence, after presenting a rather scathing account, and--imagine this--biased view of what transpired at the blogs on election night, Engberg offers the following conclusion: ''One of the verdicts rendered by election night 2004 is that, given their lack of expertise, standards and, yes, humility, the chances of the bloggers replacing mainstream journalism are about as good as the parasite replacing the dog it fastens on.''
I’m sure that all of the bloggers in America will be thrilled to know that they are being likened to fleas, mites, and ticks. However, the first issue at hand is the fact that it wasn’t the blogs that got this story wrong. Quite the contrary, they merely disseminated information that was being reported by Drudge, Slate, and, potentially most important, John Zogby. After all, this is an extraordinarily well-regarded pollster who accurately predicted Al Gore receiving more popular votes in 2000 than George W. Bush. As Zogby had been reporting from 2 pm EST on Election Day that there were some huge surprises brewing in states like Virginia, Colorado, and Pennsylvania, all the blogs were doing was addressing the opinion of one of the most respected pollsters in the nation. Ditto their announcing his 5 pm prognostication of Kerry winning the election.
However, potentially one of the differences between how the blogs reported this information versus the way the MSM did in 2000 is that the bloggers at least made their readers aware that the numbers seemed rather suspicious. I don’t recall this emanating from the MSM during the 2000 election when they called Florida for Al Gore almost exclusively as a result of exit polling information that had been supplied to them by the VNS.
In fact, suspicions regarding the accuracy of these early exit polls were conspicuous at both the liberal and conservative blogs that I was feverishly switching back and forth between. For instance, at National Review Online’s blog, folks like Kate O’Beirne and Jonah Goldberg were checking in and sharing their incites from data collected prior to the election as well as from 2000 to illustrate how questionable these numbers appeared to be. Furthermore, Drudge reported that the first wave of exit polls might be unreliable, as they had been weighted as 59% women, and 41% men. As such, in my view, the bloggers didn’t get anything wrong.
What Mr. Engberg is also conveniently missing is that the bloggers have no similar responsibility or moral requirement for accuracy as the MSM. A web log is inherently somebody’s opinion. I would fervently suggest that the overwhelming majority--a number likely approaching 99%--of the Internet surfers understand this fact significantly more than the gullible masses that on a daily basis turn on any of the news hours presented by the MSM. In fact, it is indeed the MSM that has such a responsibility to be accurate for exactly this reason--the public blindly accepts everything they report as the gospel truth. By contrast, the folks who visit blogs are quite aware of the editorial nature that is inherent in this medium, and, as a result, take much of what they read with a grain of salt.
Moreover, it is organizations that are part of the MSM who have been continually betraying the public’s trust in this regard, not the bloggers. In fact, even John Zogby had the decency to come out and apologize for his poor call on November 2. By contrast, many Americans stopped holding their breath just in time to avoid asphyxia waiting for CBS to be so graceful.
Of course, it is quite fitting that Mr. Engberg refers to himself in the midst of this prattle as a ''dinosaur.'' Now, to a certain extent, this almost rises to the level of braggadocio inasmuch as when the dinosaurs died off, at least they continued to be useful by becoming fossil fuel. By contrast, it appears that not only didn’t Engberg ever have any value to the population when he was a news correspondent, but his retirement has in no way improved his standing in this regard. As such, his perceptions concerning the future of the news industry are likely as worthless as most of his reporting throughout his undistinguished career.
Consequently, regardless of the protestations of this Stegosaurus--a dinosaur noted for its lack of intellect due to its walnut-sized brain--the MSM in its current form is indeed moving towards extinction. More and more, America wants its news raw, unfiltered, and unadulterated the moment it’s happening, not up to 24 hours after the fact neatly packaged and presented by correspondents who are hired more for their attractiveness than their grasp of the information they are disseminating. Beyond which, people who actually wait until 6:00 each evening to find out what transpired in the world since 6:00 the previous evening is probably just as close to extinction as the news divisions they hold in such high esteem.
In the end, irrespective of its lack of merit, one still has to love the delicious irony inherent in somebody associated with CBS News having the gall to chastise anybody about a lack of integrity in presenting information to the public--especially someone like this who has been the catalyst for multiple op-eds and a rather defamatory book written partially about him by a former colleague. It makes one wonder how many of Mr. Engberg’s fellow Stegosauruses are going to be required to facilitate the removal of his dorsal phalanges from his toothless beak.
About the Writer: Noel Sheppard is a business owner, economist, and writer residing in Northern California. Noel receives e-mail at slep@danvillebc.com
I remember engberg. He was one of the biggest lying RATs at SeeBS, and a real, genuine, arrogant POS. He is not missed.
"Old Media is a buggy whip manufacturer surrounded by the blogosphere."
LOL.....this is the perfect metaphor!
I agree with you.....no need to dig into this guy's personal life. What's the point? The article tells all we need to know about him. A CBS liberal who can't handle the fact that they are no longer considered credible. That isn't the fault of bloggers. That is their fault.
I am enjoying just watching the MSM hang themselves with their "blathering".
That reminds me, did Rather ever call the election for Bush yet?
-----
No. He is still waiting for the NYT to leak the results to him.
CBS & MSM are trying to defend a monopoly on dissemination and interpretation of information. They claim to hold some privileged, 'professional" position as tellers of truth...their contention is utter horsesh*t, as we all understand.
CBS will never help sell ANYTHING to my household; advertisers, spend your marketing bucks elsewhere.
I suspect the Dem's at NBC fed the bad poll numbers to Wonkette and Powerline; not sure who fed them to Drudge -- Wonkette and Drudge went with them and the rest (as they say) is history... so IMO since it was the networks and MSM who commissioned the exit polling (aka cBS and NYSlimes) I'd say the fact it got out to the bloggers isn't the blogger fault --but the MSM fault for not keeping their mouths shut -- or as I suspect purposely setting up the bloggosphere as payback for Rathergate...
Cool so now we are Knights.
Pajama Knights?
Knights of the fuuuuuuuuutuuuure?
American Knights?
I agree .. and as some blog pointed out .. no sooner had the election conspiracy blogs shown up on the internet, when the rest of the bloggers started tearing everything apart, and ended up debunking all the conspiracies.
And they say we don't have editors .. Hah!
By the way... I suspect there is a LOT MORE Hillary in Arkancide than Bill... she's the real "brains" of the outfit.
Hmmm isn't Mary Mapes and Danny boy still there? Is it time for another letter-writing campaign?
Hey, Dinosaur Media--you're over. You spent the last of your waning credibility trying to get Kerry elected. America is on to you, and it didn't work. We are watching you, but not the way you would like to think. We are faster, brighter, smarter, and we have more eyes, ears, and resources than you can possibly imagine. Enjoy your final descent into the tar pits.
The guy from powerline was doubtful of Wonkett's numbers. He was there with her when she was posting them. Powerline did not post them. Kerryites fed them to her and she ran with them.
I know and I think it was all done on purpose to trash bloggers in general... Wonkette is a little bit of a camera hound and thought she was going to break some news (IMO)... I understand she is still in denial that she was being used.
The internet has become the TRUE marketplace of ideas. Something the Universites have UTTERLY abdicated and abandoned for thought police enforcing leftist only thoughts allowed on campus.
We are the future because we are the true form of the 1st amendment. THE PEOPLE speaking, expressing, and EXAMINING idea put forth by fellow citizens. This is the first amendment in action.
CBS is just a 527 without the paperwork.
Well .. while I agree there are several of the deaths connected with the Clintons that probably should have raised more than just a few eyebrows.
Trying to connect the Clintons to these deaths without documented evidence makes it mostly a KOOK theory. This is the kind of stuff the left uses against us. It's undocumented; contains only speculation and it's not sound information.
I think even using the death of Vince Foster is a very big mistake. There is no documented evidence Hillary was involved. Do I believe she was related to it somehow .. YES! Is there proof to substantiate that theory .. NO!
There are plenty of evidentiary things we can use against Hillary without having to resort to KOOK theories.
Journalism, like many other specialized fields of the past, is being subsumed by the generic ability of information (data) processing that doesn't distinguish journalism from individual perception, nor professional from amateur. The defenders of the old status quo and hierarchies want you to buy into their premises and assumptions that journalism is what journalists do, science is what scientists do, teaching is what teachers do, etc, when the new paradigm is that with today's technology and tools, one can do whatever one wants to do, and the limits are his own competence and integrity -- that have to be earned in every undertaking and challenge. No longer can these people just run around demanding, "Do you know who I am?!!" -- as though people will accept their presumptuousness and haughtiness as signs of their presumptive status.
Now if you think people ought to listen to you, you'd better have something worthwhile to say and if one doesn't, that will be apparent. No longer does imputed status and achievements get one by. All of us are recreating and defining ourselves as we are perceiving reality unfold -- and in turn impacting the reality we are observing.
That is the major point which the old worldview being promulgated by the narrow specialists fighting to protect their exclusive turfs will not acquiesce to -- the modern notion that the observer and the observed are inextricably linked. There is no objective reality being observed by disinterested and impartial observers (journalists); a large part of what is observed is what the observer brings to the event. And in this way, the imperative to know oneself is not just metaphysically desirable but is the depth of understanding absent in the mainstream reporting but included in some Internet writing -- because it is not being edited, censored and suppressed. Bigotry is not only out there; it is obviously also in the eye of the beholder, as is beauty and every other quality we observe.
In the communication of information, the richer understanding is that the understanding evolves; if it does not, then it merely confirms our thinking and prejudices, and thus has no growth value. Obviously what is happening on the Internet and the collective consciousness which is the summation of all things, rapid growth and evolution is taking place. Past learning can categorize and generalize; it is not prepared to simply move along communicating dynamic change -- as it is happening, with no well-recognized experts.
It's very troubling for the old world order and the old world mind to deal with; thus, all they know is to protect and defend the status quo.
I agree!!
Exactly... and the strawman they are trying to put up is to claim that the bloggers' role is to be journalists.
Noel Sheppard's critique of that is right on the money -- we shouldn't let the MSM try to back bloggers and other critics into a direct comparison, since we don't have the resources to be journalists. We are merely the fact check that they SHOULD be doing, the unofficial ombudsmen that they SHOULD have on staff.
Don't like the truth coming out so fast, hum?
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.