---------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you hear the news today about Tony Rezko? Senator Obama's financial sponsor in Chicago was found guilty of 16 charges. Unlike say, Abramoff (whom I met) or Lay whose ties to President Bush were almost ancillary, yet were blasted across all major news outlets 48 hours straight -- the news media is quiet on this. Why?
In the Passover ceremony, there are the four sons (Good, Wicked, Simple and one who does not understand) and it is the duty of the assembled to explain the story. So, for all those reading, this is Joseph's story, the story of a people being naively led into bondage.
First, the wise son: The Media Research Center did a study showing 90% of the press voted for President Clinton in 1992. The argument I have, if all these reporters support the Democratic candidate (blindly) in 1992 and again in 2008 (and 2004, and 2000). How would they report on any criminal wrongdoing? Answer, they won't.
I've been involved in a Political machine. You think that Chicago's machine gets it's support with Ice Cream and Milk? Because reporters won't investigate, because they are enthralled with the candidate, they become Hagiographers, not reporters. On that, my theory is, all reporters want to be the next Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. of the next Democratic administration. Schlesinger was smarter then most reporters, but he was a political hack.
The Wicked: Tim Rutten and Anderson Cooper represent two different parts of the media. Where they become a Hydra is how they use their pulpits to defend Senator Obama. Anderson Cooper has yet to defend any Conservative shibboleth against any Liberal attacks. And Rutten, he is advertising himself to be a Hagiogropher.
The Simple: GQ shut down an article that was negative about the Clintons last year. This year, Esquire sends in a hagiogropher to report on Senator Obama. Simple question: How can reporters investigate a subject they fall in love with? They can't.
For the ones who can't understand:
Just because Vanity Fair put out a negative article this year on President Clinton does not mean when a Democrat is in power they will write negative articles.
When a journalist (meaning, someone who covers both sides of an argument -- it is the partisans job to convince the public, not the press) can write that same article when the Democrat is in power, then they can say they are "speaking Truth to Power," These folks are not Journalists, they are supplicants.
As someone who was a volunteer in the Bush-Quayle 1992 campaign, and as the Hillary 2008 campaign learned now, the press chooses it's champions and they are never Conservative.
Rezko was listed as a top story on Google News yesterday, but I'm sure media silence sounds better to make it out like your side are a bunch of victims to a nefarious liberal media conspiracy.
ReplyDeleteMirthalla was in bed with Tony Villagarosa (literally) and was let go. How can you be objective (which is what I was taught journalism) if you are in bed with, or in this case, on the same team as, the public figures you are writing about?
ReplyDeleteSimply put...You can't. Objectivity goes out the window, and the slant begins. The perception of objectivity on network news is a rouse. One can see the smirks and sly glances of glee from the liberal reporters as they tailor the news to fit their preferences. Editorial freedom is often sighted for the news deemed "newsworthy."
Fox news is conservative but at least they admit it and often give the liberal perspective with respect, letting the viewers decide for themselves. This, at least, acknowledges there are two sides to every story. Not necessarly good or bad, just different views.
NPR tries to give the impression of having no dog in the race but the LA Times (an admitted progressive or some say liberal publication) labeled NPR "Liberal.". Now THAT is the Pot calling the Kettle Charcoal.
Selective reporting is nothing new, but let's at least be honest about it.
Jason,
ReplyDeleteWe are in an election year. Here is my bet, if CNN has not led off articles for two weeks during Prime Time (and at the Situation Room) with Rezko, then I'm right.
If Rezko is on all the News Nets (Broadcast and cable), for the next two weeks, then you're right.
Bet a Pizza on it?
JSF, that would be a suckers bet. Front page news for a day is about all that story warranted in the world of corporate media. How much time do you think the Keating Five story is going to get? Unfortunately, this kind of corruption doesn't have anything sexy or enough drama to sell advertising. Unless the story involves people intensely arguing, women in thongs or somebody shouting outrageous stuff, it gets a quick mention and that's it. We live in an era of reality tv and the news has felt that influence. If there's nothing exploitative or sensational, it doesn't sell.
ReplyDeleteJason,
ReplyDeleteThen do a Google News search of Abramoff -- from first story to last. How many concecutive days did that run? Just like this year, it was an Election year.
With the WGA strike (and the possible forthcoming SAG strike), if News is on the table, then surely CNN will follow the Template they used with Abramoff.
It's not like there is Liberal Bias in the Media and GOP scandals get played every day during election season?
JSF, Abramoff had hookers. It's not the media's fault that GOP scandals usually involve more sex and drama than democratic ones. Look at all scandals on either side and see which ones get the most press. It's the ones involving sex and personal drama.
ReplyDelete