Greg Mitchell
More info HERE.
She is good.
Not to mention Dan Rathergate, CNN's skyhook scandal,exploding pickups and CNN's admission that it didn't report news from Iraq during Hussein's reign to protect their access. I'm sure there are tons more examples.
-bflr-
ping
Excellent piece, thanks for posting.
bump
Ouch!
Bump!
Ah, the famous Orwellian "memory hole" which was a plot device in "1984" (managing one of these desks was the protagonist's "gainful" occupation).
Reuter's is but one example of the "privatization" of information management.
great summation; good one to pass along to the uniformed.
Instead of addressing concerns and refuting evidence, Mitchell calls bloggers a bunch of Grassy Knoll-ers intent on discrediting “the media as a whole.” This is not the way to win trust with your audience
Today's bloggers are doing the job Editors are paid to do. Makes me wonder if Mitchel and his editor buddies spend the work day hanging out at the "Gay Bar."
Cheers,
OLA
It's obvious that the cover photo closeup in the August 28 issue, as well as several of the photos inside, have been electronically touched up to improve her facial appearance and take years off her age. In fact, a comparison of the current cover photo and one of the same subject used back in 2003 reveals a loss or attenuation of skin wrinkles, bags under the eyes, crow's feet, and other cosmetic problems on the supposedly later photo as compared to the earlier one!
Some might think nothing of this, but this chicanery is being performed by a publication which bills itself as a news magazine. But just as with Reuters, etc., fauxtography is not real journalism, but journalistic fraud.
Small wonder that Her Thighness thinks she can pull this off. Her top political advisor, Mandy Grunwald, is the daughter of the former Time editor in chief and the wife of one of Time's current journalistic "stars."
This is another MSM scandal that must be exposed out in the blogosphere!
For me the most outrageous truth about the media came with the abduction and release of the FOX journalists.
What did you hear when they were captured? Their families appealed to the barbarian gangs that they had captured the wrong people, ie the media.
You heard how they were in Gaza to "tell the Palestinian" story, that they sympathized with the "Palestinians" etc. The appeal was that the barbarians had captured their allies.
Isn't the media supposed to be neutral? I know stupid question. But how often, not withstanding doctored photos, is it so obvious- by their own admission- that the media is a tool of the "Palestinians" and other Islamists?
If I had been kidnapped and forced at gunpoint to recite from the Koran, when released I would have had a few choice words for both Islam and its followers.
What did these "journalists" do? Said nice things about Islam, absolved almost all "Palestinians" from what had happened to them, and posed smilingly with a Hamas leader.
They now get to go home. What about their colleagues who stay to "report". Think you'll get a single honest report out of Gaza from those there both "to tell the "Palestinians" story" and to survive in the Islamic jungle.
Funny how it never works the other way. If Israel or the US accidentally harms journalists, nowhere in their cry do you hear "why oh why" we were just there to tell the Israeli or the American side. Instead there are accusations, a permanent lack of forgiveness and hell to pay.
The disturbing make believe photos from this disturbing make believe event are shown below. Don’t allow children under the age of 30 to view this horror caused by Israel. Of course, this is Bush's fault.
%20copy.jpg)
No Problem! Here comes your Bomb!
![](http://www.photopile.com/photos/dead/auctions/263308.jpg")
"On Friday, the Confederate Yankee blog brought attention to a column Mitchell had written in 2003, in which he confessed to making up news as a young reporter. He had been sent out to do a story on Niagara Falls, and found himself unable to talk to tourists to get quotes. So, he sat on a bench and made the quotes up. He confessed his journalistic sin in the wake of the Jayson Blair scandal."
Folks, this is the RULE, not the exception. If it isn't a quote by a public personality with the ability to make a stink, it is a fabrication.
Lib "journalists" obey the motto that even if some piece of news doesn't fit their preordained view of how things should be, they will print what "should" have happened. Who cares about just printing what really happened, it's what should have happened that counts. So if the facts don't jibe with their prejudices, change the facts.
See my tag line.
Bump!