Posted on 09/17/2009 10:18:13 AM PDT by BigKahuna
Part of the fallout from the whole “ACORN-getting-busted-teaching-folks-how-to-be-better-pimps-and-prostitutes” thing is a long-overdue examination of the role of the mainstream media (I prefer the term "LameStream" Media) in basically covering up for the sins of the far Left these days.
The dissembling and weak excuses issuing forth from more than a few of the so-called "giants" in the media (the New York Times, the Washington Post, ABC's Charlie Gibson...who admitted to not even knowing, or caring, about the ACORN dustup etc.) over why they failed to even demonstrate a smidgeon of curiosity about what Barack Obama's favorite community organization was up to these days is highly amusing and says much about how far many news organizations have strayed from journalistic principles, I'd say.
Now, many papers are shedding readers and losing market share for many reasons -- including failing to adapt to the digital millennium in which we all live -- but one issue that continually crops up is that many people simply don't believe that traditional media outlets (especially the old guard LameStream entities like the Times and the Post, along with the three major networks and MSNBC) are capable of being impartial in most instances.
The shameless rah-rah cheerleading and boosterism for the Obama campaign in the run-up to last year's presidential election was just prelude to the full-on vicious attack led by much of the media against the growing Tea Party movement. Stories on "tea baggers" (a derogatory term many leftists seem to be intimately familiar with, for some reason) dominate instead of a thoughtful examination of just why many folks -- for the first time in their lives -- are engaging in political activism.
(Excerpt) Read more at entitlementsyndrome.com ...
How about “State Run Media”?
Tea Bagging
Definition: Perverted sexual act which Democrat men perform on each other.
Oooh, I like that!
If the “stream” in “Main Stream Media” refers to a flow of information — “Dry Gulch Media” would be an appropriate moniker.
I like Glen Beck's new phrase: "Fringe Media".
The media were suffering from severe blood loss before bammy. They now have become totally irrelevant to the process since they decided to worship him rather then report on him. This is clearly a “it sucks to be you” moment for elite/effete media mavens. So given my assessment is probably 80% correct, what can we expect from the media now? Lets see, we are all racists, we are not too bright, we are paranoid, we are need of a teachable moment. My guess is we won’t see the media do any deep soul searching - it is always someone eleses problem.
The weirdest part of Charlie’s answer was his odd demented laughter when he was asked by Don Wade and Roma about the ACORN scandal. He then said he purposely avoided seeing anything about the Saturday the 12th protest in DC, and he did this by going “sailing” blah blah blah, it was very Thurston Howell The Third. Ever since he peered down his nose through his glasses at Sarah, I can’t stand the man. He is a total moron. How could he not know about the ACORN scandal tapes a week after they started getting released? He’s lying, or more stupid than we can imagine.
I was at the beauty shop yesterday. There are 4 lovely ladies there, mostly in their fifties, down-to-earth conservative types.
So, it made me kind of sad when my operator, whom I adore, asked me if I’d watched Charlie Gibson last night. She watches him every night and believes every word he says. Last night, he apparently was saying the recession is over, and, of course, people want to believe that.
I know a lot of other people just like her. They don’t go to the internet, listen to Rush or watch Fox News.
Too many nice people still don’t have a clue about the media.
It would be interesting to ask Sarah Palin whether she knew about the Acorn story? You think Charlie is up for asking her?
You’re so right. My own parents have resisted getting satellite TV and only have the local stations. To my horror last winter I spied “Time Magazine” on their counter. I told them what I thought of Time and that it might be OK for toilet paper.....I then subscribed them to The Limbaugh Letter.
So many people still trust their newspaper and local and alphabet national news. If they don’t ever hear Rush or the other truth tellers, they just don’t know what’s happening in DC.
Yeah, the irony is thick isn’t it? He asked Sarah a purposely vague question to make her stumble for a second, and he isn’t aware of the biggest thing since Monica. What’s worse for him, not knowing or knowing and lying about it. I think he knew and at the time of the interview on WLS he was still covering for Obama. Like the rest of the state media, they think if they don’t report something bad about democrats the issue will just fade away.
We all owe Hannah and her friend a debt of gratitude for having the guts to do what the press used to do long ago.
I like Drooling Fringe Media (DFM).
Lunatic Fringe Media wouldnt be inaccurate either.
The mainstream media
just ain’t who they used to be!
ain’t who they used to be
ain’t who they used to be
The mainstream media
just ain’t who they used to be!
The People don’t believe them any more!
Those are not mutually exclusive options that need to be joined with an 'or'. The 'and' conjunction actually works perfectly and describes the actual condition.
It seems that too many journalists today are more worried about providing their own ideological slant to a hard news story in order to influence what their readers or viewers will take away from the news itself.If they’re going to do that, perhaps they shouldn’t label themselves journalists.
The conceit that journalism is objective only traces back to the mid-to-late Nineteenth Century. Before that, newspapers were openly partisan and their slant was their stock in trade. Only with the advent of the Associated Press (founded 1848 as the New York Associated Press) did newspapers acquire the motive and the opportunity to claim that all journalists were objective. The motive was to make the expensive AP newswire valuable, by hyping the sources of the AP reports. The opportunity, as we are all to familiar with it, is of course the fact that via the AP all reporters are in cahoots with each other and they suppress competition on the basis of superior objectivity.The rational approach is just to consider that "journalistic ethics" is hype, and that journalists are solely dedicated to making themselves and their friends look good, that "liberal" politicians get positive PR for the simple reason that they pander to journalism, and that the people who take responsibility to get things done (businessmen, police, the military) are their natural targets since they have principles they set higher than simply getting good PR.
Yes I think an “and” would be appropriate too. I heard that Gibson interview quite a few times and I find his giddy laughter before he answers the question to be quite odd. He sounds a few bricks short of a load.
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.