Posted on 03/15/2009 10:03:55 AM PDT by Zakeet
Pseudo-conservative Kathleen Parkers ongoing method of getting her columns published in the Washington Post bashing conservatives took another sleazy turn on Sunday, with Parker asserting in the Post that conservatives who accuse the media of a liberal bias are "non-journalists" who stoking "ignorance," like Rush Limbaugh (not to mention groups like the Media Research Center.)
The biggest challenge facing America's struggling newspaper industry may not be the high cost of newsprint or lost ad revenue, but ignorance stoked by drive-by punditry.Yes, Dittoheads, you heard it right.
Drive-by pundits, to spin off of Rush Limbaugh's "drive-by media," are non-journalists who have been demonizing the media for the past 20 years or so and who blame the current news crisis on bias.
That would seem to be a direct slap at MRC, who could be accused by a liberal of "demonizing the media for the past 20 years or so" (founded in 1987). Could there be a better way for Parker to bow and scrape before her syndicators at the Washington Post Company than to decry that American newspapers are the lifeblood of democracy, and theyre being unfairly maligned by ignorant and unprofessional hooligans?
Frankly, the idea that "drive-by pundits" who decry liberal bias are "non-journalists" is simply not true in many cases. Start with Bernard Goldberg, a long-time veteran of CBS. (Im not a "non-journalist." Im a journalist who writes about journalism. Just because the Washington Post wouldnt hire me doesnt mean Im not a journalist.)
Then, theres simply the flawed logic that a "non-journalist" cant criticize the journalist. If a plumber came into your home to a fix a leak and instead flooded the place, could the plumber argue "non-plumbers" have too much "ignorance" to complain?
She makes a lame feint to the idea that "there is some room for media criticism" and yes, some newspapers are liberal, but the charges of conservative media critics are comical:
Constant criticism of the "elite media" is comical to most reporters, whose paychecks wouldn't cover Limbaugh's annual dry cleaning bill. The truly elite media are the people most Americans have never heard of -- the daily-grind reporters who turn out for city council and school board meetings. Or the investigative teams who chase leads for months to expose abuse or corruption.These are the champions of the industry, not the food-fighters on TV or the grenade throwers on radio. Or the bloggers (with a few exceptions), who may be excellent critics and fact-checkers, but who rely on newspapers to provide their material.
As others have noted, the Internet can't quickly enough fill the void created by lost newspapers. In time, some markets simply won't have a town crier -- and then who will go to all those meetings where news is made? What will people not know? In such a vacuum, gossip rules the mob.
That is simply a cartoon, a mudslinging campaign commercial script that could be paid for by the American Society of Newspaper Editors. Clearly, the average talk-radio host doesn't make Limbaugh money, just like the average newspaper reporter doesn't make Katie Couric money. You don't dismiss the overwhelming evidence of liberal media bias by trying to distract people by talking salaries, that somehow, newspaper reporters are heroes because they helped install Obama while they made a five-figure salary.
The column is titled "Frayed Thread in a Free Society." Parkers not a conservative. Because a conservative would argue the opposite: that liberal newspapers are a threat to a free society, not conservative media critics. Liberal newspapers are the ones who wanted to make America safe for terrorist suspects. Liberal newspapers are the ones whose coverage of Iraq screamed that they wanted America to fail. Liberal newspapers are fully behind turning America into just another European-style no-growth socialist republic.
If Parker wants to fly her liberal flag and claim that only the "ignorant" believe in consistent liberal bias, then why doesn't she actually address the evidence, instead of just throwing bombs?
Kathleen Parker should look in the mirror and see just who is the "drive-by pundit."
I suspect I'm not the only one.
And I say good riddance.....
I will say she’s a HOTTIE but alas....No brain inside that pretty head. Maybe it’s good for something else ;)
As for newspapers.......As has been said why would I read something in them that I read on the internet when it was fresh.
Wait a minute.........Newspapers are good for one thing...
I do use them to line my birds cages. They are good for that......
FU Parker, get a job that does something productive.
She is not just “wrong”, she is deliberately lying to her readers.
She has joined the long running political campaign against Conservatives.
No sense arguing her premise.
Does anyone read anything this brainless wonder says?
"ignorance"?
Pray tell, Ms. Parker, of what hidden fairness of the newspaper industry are we unknowing?
That the media hounded Sarah Palin to the ends of Alaska, searching for merest tabloid scraps of was prima facie bias to any fair observer. You know full well that your precious "news"papers gave every invasive anti-Palin morsel front page ink that only the truly ignorant believe to be reserved for "news".
Simultaneusly, and to illustrate the reciprocal side, your sainted Marxist Obama was telling major league lies (forced to abandon public campaign financing because of Republican actions, "lost" senior thesis from Columbia)...palpable nonsense of course. Then, the same candidate who wants us conservatives to trust him, declines to reveal birth, school, and medical records. Any uneducated fool knows that all of these should be "red meat" for any, ANY journalist.
And, what appears on the front page of your precious newspapers, Kathleen ol' pretend-conservative friend? Barely a dismissive peep.
And you know it.
And you refer to me and my fellow conservatives as somehow ignorant, when it is you, and your fellow travelers among all of the media who are scrupulously selective over what is worthy news and over whom to promote and whom to ridicule.
You, Kathleen, have successfully lost any measure of suspect and trust you may have had. I hope you don't think it comes back if you write something nice about conservatives, including "ditto-heads" in the future.
It will not.
.
Sheesh!
Jounalism curriculum is a lot like ethnic studies, which by the way is what Obama has in mind for inner city high schools. That’s what the mean when they talk about Blacks not learning the same way as whites. It is also how they intend to narrow the gap between whites and blacks.
Very “hittable”.
Trouble is Kathy, that a lot of the people/groups that you love so much aren’t in the habit of:
1. Reading
2. Paying for things
How’s that workin’ for you?
Gee Kathleen, thanks for giving me permission to express my 1st amendment right. Where on earth would we be without you?
Rush Derangement Syndrome.
1. Reading
2. Paying for things
I call it "building the economy from the bottom up conundrum"
Good luck with that
Actually, I just enjoy highlighting the knee-pad media's hypocrisy (assuming they publish their faked photos/captions and lying editorials on purpose), or incompetence (assuming their incessant printing of such things is accidental).
Either way, they deserve a one-way trip down the drain...
;>)
Hit it?
nahhhhhhhh
If all of you were doing your job, as you state it, there would be NO problem. But the fact is, you weren't, therefore, we fired your butts.
p.s....we're not a "democratic republic", we're a free republic.
(and btw, your H2O2 is showin')
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.