Posted on 11/25/2004 7:52:43 AM PST by HighWheeler
Hoo-boy. It's a hot time in the old blogtown.
The pajamahadeen are firing their virtual bullets into the cyber-air in celebration of CBS anchor Dan Rather's announcement on Tuesday that he was retiring as the top talking face of the network after 24 years.
"This has been a simply outstanding month," crowed a poster on http://www.freerepublic.com. "Bush won, Arafat died, we're kicking ass in Fallujah, and now this!"
Typically, the above-quoted "Freeper" didn't get that Rather may be down, but he certainly isn't out. When he steps down as front man for The CBS Evening News on March 9, he will stay on as correspondent for the still much-watched 60 Minutes, as well as perform other assignments.
So it was a bit premature to be celebrating the defeat of the veteran journalist who has inspired anti-liberal websites such as http://www.RatherBiased.com and http://www.BoycottCBS.com, not to mention Doonesbury's ridiculous foreign correspondent Roland Hedley Jr., an R.E.M. hit and "Rather-gate."
As comic Jon Stewart recently pointed out, last September's 60 Minutes II fiasco, which had Rather questioning President George W. Bush's National Guard service with documents that could not be authenticated, was the only scandal of the election campaign to have merited a "-gate."
Which brings us to those pajamahadeen, the online brigades who claim credit for bringing those documents into question — and forcing Rather to apologize for his reporting.
The right-wing bloggers proudly dubbed themselves that — a play on muhajadeen, as in Muslim guerrilla fighters — when former CBS exec Jonathan Klein, in the wake of the scandal, complained to Fox News that "bloggers have no checks and balances.
"You couldn't have a starker contrast between the multiple layers of checks and balances (on network news) and a guy sitting in his living room in his pajamas writing."
By checks and balances, Klein meant the rigours of professional journalism — and not the opinionating of the blogosphere.
Ironically, bloggers mostly feed off the work of professional journalists who do the legwork. But, like parasites too stupid to realize they are killing off their hosts, the pajamahadeen don't get it every time they dig more dirt for our mass grave.
"Network news is dying and good riddence (sic)!" jubilated one of them yesterday.
It's true that journalism's checks and balances have been known to fail. When they do, news organizations crash and burn in spectacular fashion. But, much like the thousands of airplanes that land safely every day and don't make the news, major disasters are few and far between.
Still, the credibility of the corporate media continues to plummet.
In March, the Washington-based Project for Excellence in Journalism published The State of the News Media 2004, which documents an increase in superficiality and sensationalism, the declining reach of newspapers and network newscasts, cutbacks in newsroom resources and, most significantly, rising public distrust and disdain for our reportage.
Then, in June, the Canadian Media Research Consortium, a national project led by three University-based organizations to promote research on the media, (http://www.cmrcccrm.ca) came out with its Report Card On Canadian News Media. While it showed that Canadians are significantly more positive about our news sources than Americans are, citizens here believe that "powerful people or organizations" have too much influence on the media agenda.
One thing is clear from both studies: The shift from mainstream media to alternate sources such as the ethnic press, cable networks and the Internet, are threatening the future of the solid, stolid mainstream journalism.
And we don't know how to deal with it. Recently, for example, the news came from the U.K. that staid old papers are going tabloid, while the Washington Post will lighten up — all to attract elusive younger readers.
As for the newscasts of the type that Rather hosts, well, one look at the commercials for arthritis pills will tell you plenty about their demographics.
Paradoxically, young people are crowding into journalism schools, many of them in search of network TV stardom.
Still, the pajamahadeen are waging war on the mainstream media.
That includes the paper you're reading, even if you're not reading it on paper, since it is the actually selling of this paper which pays for the content you may now be reading gratis.
By the end of today, who knows how many bloggers will have had at this column? Many of them often shoot me down — and some do a pretty good job. (See letitbleed.blogs.com)
But, just like trigger happy celebrants in the Middle East, who have yet to figure out that what goes up must come down, they can't see that, by firing up at us, they will also kill themselves.
"Ironically, bloggers mostly feed off the work of professional journalists who do the legwork."
No....we feed off the lies, mistakes, and bias of "professional" journalists.
Dear Antonio,
I support my local paper even though it is a left wing rag. (Austin American Statesman) BUT - I come here to FR and trash it everyday....
and by the way....
Where are your clothes?
And on top off all these, pathetic "hit" pieces such as this, as a result! It is indeed a great month! May it last through the remainder of the year.
Cheers!
It's the author of this self-congratulting article who doesn't get it. If the result of the pajamahadeens efforts is a more responsible and accurate press, their work has been a success.
Ironically, bloggers mostly feed off the work of professional journalists who do the legwork
No, not at all. We post breaking news sometimes before the "professional journalists" are aware of it. WE are the check and balance of the "professional journalists" and they don't like it. They aren't used to being questioned--or proven wrong! They aren't used to having their slant pointed out. They aren't used to being corrected by people who don't have to go to journalism school to learn to identify the difference between fact and opinion.
This fellow seems to think we get paid to be Pajamahudeen. As in "if you destroy us you won't have a job either". Dude, it would make me very happy if there was no significant media bias to check. I could spend my time and energy on other worthwhile pursuits.
Out of self-defense for the culture, we HAVE to take these people on. I don't like to gloat when we beat them, but we need to beat them. It was unfortunate that we had to take Rather out, but he had too much power and was abusing it too badly. That is dangerous for the Republic.
Not to worry, you will soon be required to have a press card to blog.
I don't know if I've ever read a more ignorant sentence in my life.
Yup, the HildeBeast thinks the Internet doesn't have the proper controls on it.
Hello? Antonia Zerbisias? You are replaceable.
Hah! The author is just whining because the Pyjamahadeen is holding his and the rest of MSM's feet to the fire! Poor darlin's, they can't get away with making up the news any more. Should we send them some flowers? Like maybe a nice Venus Flytrap?
What a bunch of nonsense. If I want news on Iraq, I look at some blogs of people that are "doing the legwork" in Iraq by fighting, rebuilding, and living there that so happen to write an e-diary of what is going from there perspective.
In depth, varied and rich information content.
I don't think so, Antonio. Nature abhors a vacuum, and you will be replaced. As for the reasons for your impending doom, why don't you quit blaming bloggers and look in the mirror?
"You couldn't have a starker contrast between the multiple layers of checks and balances (on network news) and a guy sitting in his living room in his pajamas writing."
What he dosent realize is that everyone KNOWS you can't trust the Blogger, so you must verify what he says.
The bloggers have rightly exposed that the "multiple layers of checks and balances" is a myth.
delusional - hasn't existed in decades - although I am sure he believes that globalist crank cronkite is a "man for the ages"
I can live with that. If we didn't have to dissect every article out of the MSM, we could focus on the actual content and deal directly with the government (or other subject of the reporting.) As it is now, we spend all our time trying to ferret out the truth in MSM articles.
If the liars and propagandists wither and die, and are replaced by more "Objective Journalists"tm who actually report the truth fairly and objectively, not exaggerating or omitting important elements, we will all be better off for it.
A search of this guy's previous writing shows a lot of his articles pushing the gay agenda:
Oooh, oooh... my turn:
"Your column is pointless, unfocused, and borderline incoherent. And you suck."
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.