Around the World II...
Cruising the blogosphere, and protecting the world from liberal bias, lies and deceit. I also do a part-time gig as a real journalist right here while the MSM sits in the back on their coffee breaks.
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/weblog.php
Charles picked up on this one, and I'm pretty ticked that my own local papers haven't picked it up yet. Why am I ticked? Um, it might have something to do with the fact that this news is happening right here in Arizona.
Meanwhile, the Mexican government yesterday again condemned what it called “vigilantism” along the U.S.-Mexico border in Arizona, demanding the U.S. government ensure that the Minuteman volunteers do not abuse Mexican nationals crossing into the United States.
Mexican Consul Miguel Escobar told reporters his government “considers it unacceptable that certain people are detaining Mexican migrants.”
It was the same message delivered to U.S. government officials Feb. 10 in a diplomatic note that sought assurances that the civil rights of illegal aliens crossing into the United States would not be violated.
Mexican consulates located throughout Arizona have been told by their government to provide aid to those aliens who claim to have been abused by the Minuteman volunteers, including legal options the aliens can take if they are mistreated.
Now, let's take a look at this. First off, what the Minutemen are doing is anything but "vigilanteism". They are there to protest the Mexicans crossing our border, and to coordinate with the border patrol down there. They're not to engage the Mexicans coming over the border, and I'm sure the border patrol is appreciative of their help.
Second, Mr. Escobar is upset? How the hell does he think we feel? States such as California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas are being invaded by these interlopers. They're not "migrants". The minute their shoe hits US soil illegally, then they're criminals, and should be rounded up and sent home. If you want to come here, do it legally.
Third, as for their diplomatic note...ask me if I give a rip? Their basic right to life won't be denied them unless they decide to do something dumb, like assault a federal officer. If that happens, and it has in the past, then all bets are off, and these illegal aliens just made the crap-shot of their lives.
And lastly, since when do we allow non-citizens access to our court system? You wouldn't have "possibly" been "abused" if you hadn't been coming into our country illegally in the first place.
President Vincente Fox had better hope to God that someone like me doesn't make it into the White House. I wouldn't be taking this issue as lightly as BOTH sides of the aisle seem to be doing. Granted, there are representatives that want the issue addressed, but it's kind of hard to get anything accomplished when you're the only ones trying to drag an 800 lb. gorilla along, and your friends aren't helping.
http://instapundit.com/
Kudos to Glenn Reynolds for finding this.
http://www.metropulse.com/articles/2005/15_13/frank_talk.html
Frank Cagel's a pretty smart cookie. This article is the type the bloggers have been waiting for. As the influence and popularity of the blogosphere grow, the significance of the MSM continues to fold even quicker than before. And in 2006, the bloggers will have a severe impact on the mid-term elections.
The growth of weblogs and their growing audience has created a wild card in the arena of ideas, especially political ideas. The gatekeepers are still there, but the back door is open. The Tennessee elections of 2006 will be the first statewide elections in which critical mass has been achieved, so that established blogs, e-mail newsletters and websites will dominate political news. It has already begun, 16 months in advance of the Republican senatorial primary. It is apparent that cyberspace will be preoccupied with racing to post the latest in campaign news, poll results or signs of apostasy to conservative doctrine. There will also be Democrat-leaning blogs that will enjoy it all and gleefully call out their Republican counterparts.
If you are a political junkie, it’s manna from heaven. News organizations give scant coverage of political races until the final weeks. The question of this campaign season is whether mainstream news organizations will cede blow-by-blow coverage to the blogs, the e-mail newsletters and the campaign websites. There is an argument to be made that, given the low interest of the greater population in political minutia, having these cyberspace alternatives is a perfect example of a niche market. But will news organizations be willing to allow any niche to get away these days? They are also conceding the pre-primary, when political activists, contributors and interest groups are making up their minds about candidates. It is among these people that blogs will have the most influence because they are there and because it’s the only political news available.
But that’s hardly the most pressing issue news organizations will face. In olden days (the 1990s), the gatekeepers could decide on which news was fit to print or broadcast. During hard-fought political campaigns, a lot of stuff gets thrown up in the air. Some of it wrong, some of it distorted, some of it true but unproveable. Some of it is just good gossip. Editors and news directors traditionally had the job of sorting through it and deciding what they were comfortable reporting. What happens in the brave new world of cyberspace?
Perhaps news organizations will report things they normally wouldn’t report using the convenient fig leaf: We don’t know if it’s true, but a certain blog says this or some website has posted that. It’s hardly an ethically defensible position, but do they sit there and say nothing when everyone with a computer is discussing what they read over at caswalker.com?
So do news organizations wait for a candidate to attack allegations on a blog, then use the candidate’s protestations as an excuse to “report” baseless allegations? Will candidates be smart enough not to comment on blog allegations because they know how that will give news organizations the opportunity to get into the dirt? But can they ignore allegations when every place they go a reporter asks them if the allegations are true? These are some of the issues that news organizations will have to deal with in this and all future elections.
I do not mean to suggest that information on blogs is suspect. Very often it is produced by someone with more expertise than a general-assignment reporter. The check on traditional news organizations is that a concern for the institutional credibility that has accrued over decades makes them careful. Even in the age of Mary Mapes and Jason Blair, we still cede the media a lot of credibility. But blogs are like newspaper editorial pages. Over time you come to judge them as thoughtful, informative and reliable. Or you come to see them as hopeless, clueless foolishness. Regular reading helps you decide whether the source is sound, whether the source is a blog or a newspaper.
But the days when a few political reporters or editors could decide the news are over.
Cagel's nailed it like no one else, aside from Hugh Hewitt, ever has. When bloggers can beat the media to the punch, and our facts are confirmed and accurate, WE get to steer the direction of the news. Notice how during the Dan Rather blow-up, the outcry from the blogosphere was so loud, that CBS News and Dan Rather had to answer the charges. When they poo-pooed it away as a bunch of nuts in "pajamas" just out muck-raking, the ire was raised. Granted, some of us do like to blog in our PJ's (Hey! They're comfy!)but we don't set out to rock the boat. That was never the point of me jumping into this medium.
The point of me joining the blogosphere was to research and report on news that the MSM did not want to touch. What the MSM has not picked up yet is we bloggers can be their best friend, or their worst nightmare. Those that do not believe that might want to contact a few people and ask them how they felt being raked over the coals when the swarms were loosed on them. Those would be the five heads mounted on our wall in the living room: Trent Lott, Howell Raines, John Kerry, Dan Rather, and Eason Jordan.
This is not Scooby-Doo here. We're not a bunch of "meddling" kids. Much of the blogosphere is made up of working professionals or retired professionals that have resumes that would make most reporters weep for their own inexperiences in life. And those that have crossed the creme de la creme of the blogosphere are left with scars that'll last a lifetime.
Publius II & ;)
Cruising the blogosphere, and protecting the world from liberal bias, lies and deceit. I also do a part-time gig as a real journalist right here while the MSM sits in the back on their coffee breaks.
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/weblog.php
Charles picked up on this one, and I'm pretty ticked that my own local papers haven't picked it up yet. Why am I ticked? Um, it might have something to do with the fact that this news is happening right here in Arizona.
Meanwhile, the Mexican government yesterday again condemned what it called “vigilantism” along the U.S.-Mexico border in Arizona, demanding the U.S. government ensure that the Minuteman volunteers do not abuse Mexican nationals crossing into the United States.
Mexican Consul Miguel Escobar told reporters his government “considers it unacceptable that certain people are detaining Mexican migrants.”
It was the same message delivered to U.S. government officials Feb. 10 in a diplomatic note that sought assurances that the civil rights of illegal aliens crossing into the United States would not be violated.
Mexican consulates located throughout Arizona have been told by their government to provide aid to those aliens who claim to have been abused by the Minuteman volunteers, including legal options the aliens can take if they are mistreated.
Now, let's take a look at this. First off, what the Minutemen are doing is anything but "vigilanteism". They are there to protest the Mexicans crossing our border, and to coordinate with the border patrol down there. They're not to engage the Mexicans coming over the border, and I'm sure the border patrol is appreciative of their help.
Second, Mr. Escobar is upset? How the hell does he think we feel? States such as California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas are being invaded by these interlopers. They're not "migrants". The minute their shoe hits US soil illegally, then they're criminals, and should be rounded up and sent home. If you want to come here, do it legally.
Third, as for their diplomatic note...ask me if I give a rip? Their basic right to life won't be denied them unless they decide to do something dumb, like assault a federal officer. If that happens, and it has in the past, then all bets are off, and these illegal aliens just made the crap-shot of their lives.
And lastly, since when do we allow non-citizens access to our court system? You wouldn't have "possibly" been "abused" if you hadn't been coming into our country illegally in the first place.
President Vincente Fox had better hope to God that someone like me doesn't make it into the White House. I wouldn't be taking this issue as lightly as BOTH sides of the aisle seem to be doing. Granted, there are representatives that want the issue addressed, but it's kind of hard to get anything accomplished when you're the only ones trying to drag an 800 lb. gorilla along, and your friends aren't helping.
http://instapundit.com/
Kudos to Glenn Reynolds for finding this.
http://www.metropulse.com/articles/2005/15_13/frank_talk.html
Frank Cagel's a pretty smart cookie. This article is the type the bloggers have been waiting for. As the influence and popularity of the blogosphere grow, the significance of the MSM continues to fold even quicker than before. And in 2006, the bloggers will have a severe impact on the mid-term elections.
The growth of weblogs and their growing audience has created a wild card in the arena of ideas, especially political ideas. The gatekeepers are still there, but the back door is open. The Tennessee elections of 2006 will be the first statewide elections in which critical mass has been achieved, so that established blogs, e-mail newsletters and websites will dominate political news. It has already begun, 16 months in advance of the Republican senatorial primary. It is apparent that cyberspace will be preoccupied with racing to post the latest in campaign news, poll results or signs of apostasy to conservative doctrine. There will also be Democrat-leaning blogs that will enjoy it all and gleefully call out their Republican counterparts.
If you are a political junkie, it’s manna from heaven. News organizations give scant coverage of political races until the final weeks. The question of this campaign season is whether mainstream news organizations will cede blow-by-blow coverage to the blogs, the e-mail newsletters and the campaign websites. There is an argument to be made that, given the low interest of the greater population in political minutia, having these cyberspace alternatives is a perfect example of a niche market. But will news organizations be willing to allow any niche to get away these days? They are also conceding the pre-primary, when political activists, contributors and interest groups are making up their minds about candidates. It is among these people that blogs will have the most influence because they are there and because it’s the only political news available.
But that’s hardly the most pressing issue news organizations will face. In olden days (the 1990s), the gatekeepers could decide on which news was fit to print or broadcast. During hard-fought political campaigns, a lot of stuff gets thrown up in the air. Some of it wrong, some of it distorted, some of it true but unproveable. Some of it is just good gossip. Editors and news directors traditionally had the job of sorting through it and deciding what they were comfortable reporting. What happens in the brave new world of cyberspace?
Perhaps news organizations will report things they normally wouldn’t report using the convenient fig leaf: We don’t know if it’s true, but a certain blog says this or some website has posted that. It’s hardly an ethically defensible position, but do they sit there and say nothing when everyone with a computer is discussing what they read over at caswalker.com?
So do news organizations wait for a candidate to attack allegations on a blog, then use the candidate’s protestations as an excuse to “report” baseless allegations? Will candidates be smart enough not to comment on blog allegations because they know how that will give news organizations the opportunity to get into the dirt? But can they ignore allegations when every place they go a reporter asks them if the allegations are true? These are some of the issues that news organizations will have to deal with in this and all future elections.
I do not mean to suggest that information on blogs is suspect. Very often it is produced by someone with more expertise than a general-assignment reporter. The check on traditional news organizations is that a concern for the institutional credibility that has accrued over decades makes them careful. Even in the age of Mary Mapes and Jason Blair, we still cede the media a lot of credibility. But blogs are like newspaper editorial pages. Over time you come to judge them as thoughtful, informative and reliable. Or you come to see them as hopeless, clueless foolishness. Regular reading helps you decide whether the source is sound, whether the source is a blog or a newspaper.
But the days when a few political reporters or editors could decide the news are over.
Cagel's nailed it like no one else, aside from Hugh Hewitt, ever has. When bloggers can beat the media to the punch, and our facts are confirmed and accurate, WE get to steer the direction of the news. Notice how during the Dan Rather blow-up, the outcry from the blogosphere was so loud, that CBS News and Dan Rather had to answer the charges. When they poo-pooed it away as a bunch of nuts in "pajamas" just out muck-raking, the ire was raised. Granted, some of us do like to blog in our PJ's (Hey! They're comfy!)but we don't set out to rock the boat. That was never the point of me jumping into this medium.
The point of me joining the blogosphere was to research and report on news that the MSM did not want to touch. What the MSM has not picked up yet is we bloggers can be their best friend, or their worst nightmare. Those that do not believe that might want to contact a few people and ask them how they felt being raked over the coals when the swarms were loosed on them. Those would be the five heads mounted on our wall in the living room: Trent Lott, Howell Raines, John Kerry, Dan Rather, and Eason Jordan.
This is not Scooby-Doo here. We're not a bunch of "meddling" kids. Much of the blogosphere is made up of working professionals or retired professionals that have resumes that would make most reporters weep for their own inexperiences in life. And those that have crossed the creme de la creme of the blogosphere are left with scars that'll last a lifetime.
Publius II & ;)
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 1:48 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home