How Closely Life Mimics Cartoons...
Our regular readers know that we find solace in Chris Muir’s extremely amusing cartoons. They do present a welcome repose to the day; when we need a laugh, we load his site. (Why load ours? The hits do not count, so give him the hits.) But it is amazing how sometimes life can mirror the events of the day.
I am a comics person. I hit the news of the day in the newspaper, but as soon as it is done and over with, I hit the comics page; I need a laugh by that point just to reduce my blood pressure. I love Foxtrot and Garfield in my paper. I never miss Maxine, Mallard Fillmore, or Day by Day (Duh, it is on our site. LOL). But when one looks at TODAY’s post, we are reminded of the latest spin by the media over the Newsweek story. Thomas posted an appropriate piece entitled "Flushed, but accurate", which is now the spin presented by the MSM.
Not just on the Newsweek story, but also with the Rathergate story; a relevant subject as the man just received a Peabody Award for his coverage of the media-made, media-driven Abu Ghraib scandal. This award he dedicated to Mary Mapes—his cohort in the journalistic "crime" of lying.
The MSM has decided to drag poor, old Dan Rather out, and hang the martyr’s banner on him: The Bugh TANG story might be true. The Newsweek story might be true. Could someone get the frothing masses some Valium, already? Please. The "fake, but accurate" (I prefer my other half’s take, TY) defense is old and worn out. The Rather Memos were debunked.
Dan Rather presented those memos to America, and stood beside their authenticity. Too bad the bloggers crushed that story; one I am positive that Rather was willing to hang his hat on as a memorial to his undaunted years of service to CBS News, and broadcasting journalism, in general. And hang his hat on it he did. Too bad the hat had a noose, and Rather stuck his head firmly in the middle of that noose. The bloggers did the rest.
Charles Johnson’s fisking of the memo was priceless; those that wish to go to his site and watch the flash media, it is amusing. The memos, once thrown into absolute question, became the first instance of the "fake, but accurate" defense of the MSM as everyone of note—including Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings—came rushing to Rather’s aid. Fine, they can go down too. We bloggers have no compunction taking down more than one target. Brokaw gave the bloggers a monniker they wear proudly; the Pajamahadeen. (Thanks Tom, instead of hurting us, you have drawn more to our side.)
Needless to say, once the bloggers made a laughing-stock of Rather, their mark was made on a point of history that served as a nexus; no longer could the media be trusted. And with that turning point came a level of ombudsmanship that the media was ill-equipped and quite reluctant to accept. And who could blame them? Fpr years they had the run of the communication’s airwaves. Whether it was radio or TV, the media had a veritable monopoly. When the Internet arrived they thought they were prepared. Bloggers showed that their level of preparation was inadequate, at best.
And Newsweek lost this last round. They threw out a story they knew would have some serious consequences, if true; an insinuation they had, but it was not backed up at all. Isikoff’s source quickly deserted him when the story turned explosive, and the bloggers were decimating Newsweek. Many people discount bloggers as second-rate amateurs. I disagree because the scrutiny placed on Newsweek reached every conceptual level.
The questions of the physical capability to actually flush a Koran came up. As did the questions of why the Pentagon had not come out—formally—to acknowledge or disavow the claims; a point Newsweek ran without the Pentagon’s affirmation. Add to the fact that they should have known a claim within their magazine—and international publication—MIGHT inflame Muslims. (Hello? Is anyone at home upstairs? Think guys.)
But the rumors are already coming out that Rove was behind this, and the MSM is holding the administration accountable for it. This is liberal logic at it’s best; the story reported was false, so hold the administration responsible. Never mind the fact you it without an official statement from the administration, that the Pentagon asked you to hold off until the investigation was concluded, or that you failed to gain more than one source to corroborate the story; let’s just run with what we have.
Why hold off? Well, the seventeen dead is a nice reminder. And this mistake reminds us of the media’s inability to police itself. Enter the bloggers. And they can spin it any way they would like to, but "fake, but accurate" does not even pass the smell test. It did not work for Dan Rather (despite the idiots handing out awards at the Peabody’s), and it does not work for Newsweek either. Accountability is needed to amend this offense. A phony inquiry, and a slap on the wrist will not do. Time for Evan Thomas, or Mark Whitaker, or both to go.
The Bunny ;)
Our regular readers know that we find solace in Chris Muir’s extremely amusing cartoons. They do present a welcome repose to the day; when we need a laugh, we load his site. (Why load ours? The hits do not count, so give him the hits.) But it is amazing how sometimes life can mirror the events of the day.
I am a comics person. I hit the news of the day in the newspaper, but as soon as it is done and over with, I hit the comics page; I need a laugh by that point just to reduce my blood pressure. I love Foxtrot and Garfield in my paper. I never miss Maxine, Mallard Fillmore, or Day by Day (Duh, it is on our site. LOL). But when one looks at TODAY’s post, we are reminded of the latest spin by the media over the Newsweek story. Thomas posted an appropriate piece entitled "Flushed, but accurate", which is now the spin presented by the MSM.
Not just on the Newsweek story, but also with the Rathergate story; a relevant subject as the man just received a Peabody Award for his coverage of the media-made, media-driven Abu Ghraib scandal. This award he dedicated to Mary Mapes—his cohort in the journalistic "crime" of lying.
The MSM has decided to drag poor, old Dan Rather out, and hang the martyr’s banner on him: The Bugh TANG story might be true. The Newsweek story might be true. Could someone get the frothing masses some Valium, already? Please. The "fake, but accurate" (I prefer my other half’s take, TY) defense is old and worn out. The Rather Memos were debunked.
Dan Rather presented those memos to America, and stood beside their authenticity. Too bad the bloggers crushed that story; one I am positive that Rather was willing to hang his hat on as a memorial to his undaunted years of service to CBS News, and broadcasting journalism, in general. And hang his hat on it he did. Too bad the hat had a noose, and Rather stuck his head firmly in the middle of that noose. The bloggers did the rest.
Charles Johnson’s fisking of the memo was priceless; those that wish to go to his site and watch the flash media, it is amusing. The memos, once thrown into absolute question, became the first instance of the "fake, but accurate" defense of the MSM as everyone of note—including Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings—came rushing to Rather’s aid. Fine, they can go down too. We bloggers have no compunction taking down more than one target. Brokaw gave the bloggers a monniker they wear proudly; the Pajamahadeen. (Thanks Tom, instead of hurting us, you have drawn more to our side.)
Needless to say, once the bloggers made a laughing-stock of Rather, their mark was made on a point of history that served as a nexus; no longer could the media be trusted. And with that turning point came a level of ombudsmanship that the media was ill-equipped and quite reluctant to accept. And who could blame them? Fpr years they had the run of the communication’s airwaves. Whether it was radio or TV, the media had a veritable monopoly. When the Internet arrived they thought they were prepared. Bloggers showed that their level of preparation was inadequate, at best.
And Newsweek lost this last round. They threw out a story they knew would have some serious consequences, if true; an insinuation they had, but it was not backed up at all. Isikoff’s source quickly deserted him when the story turned explosive, and the bloggers were decimating Newsweek. Many people discount bloggers as second-rate amateurs. I disagree because the scrutiny placed on Newsweek reached every conceptual level.
The questions of the physical capability to actually flush a Koran came up. As did the questions of why the Pentagon had not come out—formally—to acknowledge or disavow the claims; a point Newsweek ran without the Pentagon’s affirmation. Add to the fact that they should have known a claim within their magazine—and international publication—MIGHT inflame Muslims. (Hello? Is anyone at home upstairs? Think guys.)
But the rumors are already coming out that Rove was behind this, and the MSM is holding the administration accountable for it. This is liberal logic at it’s best; the story reported was false, so hold the administration responsible. Never mind the fact you it without an official statement from the administration, that the Pentagon asked you to hold off until the investigation was concluded, or that you failed to gain more than one source to corroborate the story; let’s just run with what we have.
Why hold off? Well, the seventeen dead is a nice reminder. And this mistake reminds us of the media’s inability to police itself. Enter the bloggers. And they can spin it any way they would like to, but "fake, but accurate" does not even pass the smell test. It did not work for Dan Rather (despite the idiots handing out awards at the Peabody’s), and it does not work for Newsweek either. Accountability is needed to amend this offense. A phony inquiry, and a slap on the wrist will not do. Time for Evan Thomas, or Mark Whitaker, or both to go.
The Bunny ;)
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 8:47 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home