Blogger Kennedy: Banfield was right, "of course" (MOAB -Mother-of-all-Barfs Alert)

The Boston Phoenix ^ | 4/29/03 | Dan Kennedy

[BaghdadBarney]

Banfield's too good for them.

Let me see if I've got this straight. Right-wing homophobic talk-show host Michael Savage, in his "book," The Savage Nation, jokes that MSNBC stands for "More Snotty Nonsense By Creeps" and refers to MSNBC reporter Ashleigh Banfield as "the mind-slut with a big pair of glasses that they sent to Afghanistan."

So how did MSNBC executives respond? Why, they hired him, of course. And when he called Banfield a "slut" on the air for daring to interview loyalists to Saddam Hussein, his bosses reacted with silence.

Now Banfield has chosen to speak out, criticizing the networks -- not just her own -- for portraying the war as a glorious romp for democracy rather than the more complex and bloody conflict that it was.

"You did not see where those bullets landed. You didn't see what happened when the mortars landed. A puff of smoke is not what a mortar looks like when it explodes, believe me," Banfield said at a speech at Kansas State University last week.

She also dared to take on Savage, saying: He was so taken aback by my daring to speak to martyrs ... for being prepared to sacrifice themselves, he chose to label me a slut on the air, and that's not all, as a porn star and an accessory to the murder of Jewish children. These are the ramifications for simply bringing the message in the Arab world.

A rational response might be to cheer Banfield for stating some obvious truths that few mainstream-media people want to say. But, noooo. Instead, NBC News released a statement saying:

Ms. Banfield does not speak for NBC News. We are deeply disappointed and troubled by her remarks, and will review her comments with her. In the meantime, we want to emphasize how proud we are of the journalism produced by NBC News and of the men and women who worked around the clock, even risking their lives, to bring this story to the American public.

Unfortunately, what's going on is very simple. Banfield is absolutely right about the war coverage, and besides, she's simply defending herself from someone who has attacked her twice in grotesquely sexist terms. But MSNBC's past attempts to turn her into its hot-babe marquee ratings star failed, so she's not allowed to speak out.

She'll be gone -- soon. So will Savage, after it becomes clear that his hate-filled, lower-than-public-access-quality talk show is a ratings loser. And MSNBC will continue its long, unwatched march into oblivion.

[BaghdadBarney]

Mr. Kennedy: I didn't know riding around and highlighting the exploits of Arafat's Al-Aqsa "martyrs" (most of you out there in TV Land would know them by their more proper name: TERRORISTS) was some high calling of journalism. Maybe my memory is not so good on this but I certainly DON'T remember William L. Shirer riding along with a bunch of Nazi Brown shirts looking for innocent Jews to beat up, maim, and kill...

[KellyAdmirer]

She'll be gone -- soon.

Mr. Riker, make it so!

[NittanyLion]

While I don't agree with Banfield, I have to note my disgust and embarrassment with Savage's comments. He's totally out of line.

[jraven]

I LIKE Michael Savage...but this guy is RIGHT. They did NOT take Michael Savage to task. So there IS a double standard. How can we screech about this when it applies to conservatives...but not when it applies to others? Sorry...this column MAKES ITS CASE. MSNBC is not applying rules across the board. That's WRONG if it singles out a liberal as well as a conservative. It shows that SOME free speech is allowed, but not others.

[Timesink]

Dan makes some good points in here, but he overlooks - probably intentionally - the deeper realities of each situation. Savage is a professional bombthrower, the type who likes to use rhetoric to make a lot of smoke. He's fun to listen to, but you're not going to base your whole political ideology on his teachings.

More importantly, he is not, and does not claim to be, a journalist. And most, if not all, of what he said about MSNBC he said before he was hired.

Banfield IS a journalist. She ALREADY works for MSNBC. And she said things a lot more cutting than "MSNBC stands for More Snotty Nonsense By Creeps". She essentially performed an act of abject insubordination, going out in public and raking her bosses over the coals and accusing them of doing bad work.

I don't know about you, but if I did that I'd be fired today, not tomorrow. The actions of these two people are simply not comparable, at all.

[Timesink]

She'll be gone -- soon.

Most likely back to Canada.

[Desecrated]

"He was so taken aback by my daring to speak to martyrs ... for being prepared to sacrifice themselves, he chose to label me a slut on the air, and that's not all, as a porn star and an accessory to the murder of Jewish children. These are the ramifications for simply bringing the message in the Arab world."

Let's see, "martyrs" and "sacrifice themselves" in only one sentence. Nope, no bias there. To legitimize, in any way, the actions of palestinian terrorists, including "bringing the message", is aid and comfort.

[Honestfreedom]

You need to understand the difference between a journalist (which Ms. Ashfield supposedly is) and a commentator. One reports the news the other comments. Savage's words were harsh but totally deserving for someone riding around with terrorists looking for Jews to murder. Would she have ridden around with the SS when they rounded up Jews.

[Blue Screen of Death]

the mind-slut with a big pair of glasses that they sent to Afghanistan

This is an unfair attack. Her glasses are not all that big.

[BaghdadBarney]

To be honest, Savage is almost always out of line. He just happened to be right about Banfield carrying the blood-filled water bucket of the PLO. His general characterization of over-40 reporterettes as "porn stars" in their 20s, et al. (which he details in his book) is especially heinous...

[freepy smurf]

I love Savage. The way he makes liberals cringe an foam at the mouth gives me great satisfaction.

[BaghdadBarney]

But MSBNC hired Savage knowing he had uttered his critique of the network. The comments were uttered before MSNBC hired him. And besides Savage is pundit, not a reporter. He hurls opinions; he doesn't file news stories. Banfield is a journalist, period. Her comments about Savage were inbounds (he's fair game as far as I'm concerned) but for Banfield to rip her journalist colleagues - that's a whole different ballgame...

[cmsgop]

[TheCrusader]

"While I don't agree with Banfield, I have to note my disgust and embarrassment with Savage's comments. He's totally out of line."

---

Savage is right, she prostituted herself in a sickening act of treachery and anti Americanism in exchange for a little notoriety. She called the Iraqis "martyrs". Well guess how they get to be martyrs, my dear? They must be killed by an INFIDEL. In the mind of this idiot Banfield, Americans are "infidels". She is indeed a slut, of the worst kind..

[Lael]

In the mind of this idiot Banfield, Americans are "infidels". She is indeed a slut, of the worst kind..

Savage opens HIS radio show with "Hello, INFIDELS!!

LOL!!

Look, he has said bad things about Chris Mathews and others...but that isn't the point!

If even 20% of his Radio audience tunes in, Savage blows the other Cable news channels right out of the water in that time slot!

Strictly a crossover deal.

[ThanhPhero]

MSNBC is looking to its bottom line.They have been getting buried by the conservative competition and have discovered that there really is a market out there for conservative tv. Savage would not have been my first choice to staff that slot but hey- we wre not in such a position that one ranter can do us damage. Our guys pretty much own the airwaves now. Savage just adđs a little color to the great mass of conservative broadcasting and will not be taken as characterizing that mass except by the lefties who talk only to themselves these days.