When Will Reporters Learn?
(Hat-tip: Captain’s Quarters)
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/005136.php
Nancy Clark is a sports writer for the Des Moines Register. Now, I like sports, and so does Thomas. As far as I know, all the lunatics at the Asylum like sports. For the most part, we pay little attention to sports writers. This is for two reasons.
First, these people are no better than anyone else in the MSM, as they, too, frequently stir up the pot, and make assertions; those, mind you, are based very little on fact. Do not get me wrong, some sports writers are very good at their job, and some are hacks. This goes back to the initial point of not being better than anyone else in the MSM.
Second, whether it be through guilt or boredom, sometimes these people delve into a side of journalism where their lack of understanding shows plainly through.
Such is the case for Ms. Clark. First off, she starts by dropping names of people that no one (Okay, maybe someone) has ever heard of before, and proceeds to tell us that bloggers will not talk to them. Okay, but what does that have to do with the price of tea in China. As poli-bloggers, these names do not even register on our radar screens. They are not a "mover" or a "shaker" in the Beltway. No one is talking about them, and they have no connection to the political machine in Washington. So, who cares about the guys she lists?
As a sports journalist, she gets paid to interview people that the average America can barely recognize, if they know them at all. That is her job. Thomas and I do not get paid to blog. We blog because we like to, and we like being a part of an alternative media source that seems to go through far more fact-checking than the MSM does. (Does anyone remember Jayson Blair for the New York Times, and the 200+ corrections that had to be made for his lies?)
But this column was not just to have her drop a few names, and try to get a level of one-upmanship on the bloggers. No, like every other moron journalist out there that dislikes the bloggers (mostly because we end up showing these fools up, time and again), and she has decided to take a swipe at us.
The State of the News Media Report is an annual review by the Project for Excellence in Journalism, part of the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism in New York.
The conclusion of the 600-page report was that the traditional "journalism of verification," in which reporters check facts, is being infringed upon by a new model of journalism that is "faster, looser and cheaper."
Infringed upon? Well, no offense, but if journalists and editors did their jobs, the bloggers would be out of one. They would be relegated to covering little factoids from areas of America or around the globe that media services deem too small a story to bother with reporting it. (Like the big news story that Bill Clinton was offered 40 goats and 20 cows for his daughter’s hand in marriage to a tribal leader in Kenya. BTW, Bill said no, but asked what the guy could give him for Hillary. Can I please get a rimshot for that one?) The media enjoyed covering that little story of amusement, but they refuse to touch Mugabe in Zimbabwe slaughtering his population in what the UN sees as non-genocide genocide.
But, she goes on.
In the new "journalism of assertion," as the report calls it, information is offered with little time and little attempt to independently verify its voracity.
You have to love those editorial checks and balances. "Voracity" means to be in the state or quality of being voracious, which means ravenous. The MSM, as Captain Ed appropriately points out, is quite voracious when it comes to it’s reporting, and it’s bias. They ravenously attack and slander anyone on the right side of the ideological scale, and defend those on the Left side—the side that they agree with most—against any questions that may embarrass those allies.
I believe she meant to use the word "veracity" which means to be devoted to the truth, to be accurate, etc. This is something that the MSM does not abide to. If they did, they would not be caught in so many lies by the "journalism of assertion," as she and this ridiculous report calls bloggers. There is no assertion made by bloggers. We report the facts we have, and it comes with a level of in-depth research. Thomas and I have quite a few contacts we speak on a weekly basis to keep us updated on what is going on with a variety of subjects. From time to time, those contacts fail us. It is a part of life. We move forward with the facts we have in hand—verified as far as they will go—and should we be wrong, we post a correction. Bloggers are not often wrong on the right-center side of the blogosphere. The DailyKos kids on the other hand, well...that’s his problem, not ours.
In other words, bloggers and some radio and cable talk show hosts make up stories and spread rumors. Too often, consumers don't know the difference between these lies and mainstream news reports.
When we established this site, we made a commitment to each other and our readers that we would do our best to report fact, and not rumor. Now, over the Rehnquist retirement talk that was going on, Thomas had two sources confirming that the Chief Justice was stepping down. When he did not, Thomas apologized on our site. We try to hold the highest integrity possible. If we stumble or screw up, we lose readers. Those are the people we are ultimately beholden to. The MSM does not think that way. They know that, for the most part, their subscribers will still get their cage liner—day in and day out—like a gerbil hitting a feeder bar for it’s next meal.
And the consumers do know the difference between rumors and lies. The bloggers have handled more stories of prominent interest than the MSM has. The MSM gave Sen. Durbin a pass regarding his statements about Gitmo. They gave Indira Nooyi—PepsiCo’s COO—for comparing the US to the middle finger. They gave Dan Rather a pass over the Rathergate scandal. They give passes to anyone who shares their ideology, and they savage anyone they disagree with. That is when the consumer realized that something was not right with their trusted news services any longer. The news was no longer fair or balanced. It was no longer objective. It was slanted, and still is so.
The report on the threat to traditional journalism focused on political reporting - remember the allegations by the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" that, after weeks of reporting, were found to be unsubstantiated?
This is rich. An allegation would be an unproven accusation. To date, more information has come out about Sen. Kerry’s service record regarding his missions in Vietnam. Thomas did an outstanding column for a website "CommonConservative.com" that absolutely destroyed Kerry’s "Christmas-Not-In-Cambodia" story, and it was based—for the most part—on the technicalities of it. Kerry also claimed that he ran guns for the Khmer Rouge, which was proven to be false. The man was a liar, and the bloggers outed him as such to the point where Kerry finally shut his yap about those things because every time he opened his mouth about these subjects, the story kept changing. We should also remember the awards he was given, and how he swore up and down what they were, then later recanted on one of them—his Bronze Star, if memory serves me correctly.
The Cambodia story started with a CIA operative operating in Cambodia. Kerry supposedly received a "lucky hat" from the guy. The story, after enough people asked him to name the operative, changed to ferrying Navy SEALs up to Cambodia. This is a factual inaccuracy, as the SEALs never would have used a Swift Boat to go anywhere near what was enemy territory; their covert insertion would have been blown in an instant. Add to the fact that the SEALs NEVER used Swift Boats. They used the Navy Sea Wolves helicopter group and the Brown Water Navy. But, I guess we should not let FACTS get in the way of Ms. Clark’s uneducated rant against the bloggers, now should we? And this rant was much like the ones the MSM pulled out on the Swift Boat Vets, accusing them of attacking Kerry with no facts, despite the simple fact that the MSM could not prove them wrong.
In short, I would suggest to Ms. Clark that her and her lazy, biased ilk in the MSM better do some soul-searching, and I mean more than what the Democrats have done thus far after losing the last few elections. The public no longer regards the MSM as trustworthy. They no longer look to them for serious information, and those that have no choice take what the MSM with a grain of salt, and quite a bit of doubt. The media pushes an agenda on a daily basis and have polls to back up their assertions. But when you control the polls, how the questions are worded, and appeal only to those that do not pay as close attention to the news as others—like bloggers—do, then you are bound to end up with a public that is as equally ill-educated about things as the MSM is.
But, times are changing. People are walking away from the MSM. And they are walking right up to sites like Michelle Malkin’s, Hugh Hewitt’s, Captain’s Quarters, Drudge, and yes, even the little fish like us. But that is what makes us who we are. We do the checking the MSM does not do. We ask the questions that the monkeys in the media refuse to ask. And we are not afraid to get a little dirty in the process if that is what it takes to get out the facts. That is our job. The truth is for our readers to decide.
"Don’t hate me Trinity; I’m just the messenger."—The Matrix
The Bunny ;)
(Hat-tip: Captain’s Quarters)
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/005136.php
Nancy Clark is a sports writer for the Des Moines Register. Now, I like sports, and so does Thomas. As far as I know, all the lunatics at the Asylum like sports. For the most part, we pay little attention to sports writers. This is for two reasons.
First, these people are no better than anyone else in the MSM, as they, too, frequently stir up the pot, and make assertions; those, mind you, are based very little on fact. Do not get me wrong, some sports writers are very good at their job, and some are hacks. This goes back to the initial point of not being better than anyone else in the MSM.
Second, whether it be through guilt or boredom, sometimes these people delve into a side of journalism where their lack of understanding shows plainly through.
Such is the case for Ms. Clark. First off, she starts by dropping names of people that no one (Okay, maybe someone) has ever heard of before, and proceeds to tell us that bloggers will not talk to them. Okay, but what does that have to do with the price of tea in China. As poli-bloggers, these names do not even register on our radar screens. They are not a "mover" or a "shaker" in the Beltway. No one is talking about them, and they have no connection to the political machine in Washington. So, who cares about the guys she lists?
As a sports journalist, she gets paid to interview people that the average America can barely recognize, if they know them at all. That is her job. Thomas and I do not get paid to blog. We blog because we like to, and we like being a part of an alternative media source that seems to go through far more fact-checking than the MSM does. (Does anyone remember Jayson Blair for the New York Times, and the 200+ corrections that had to be made for his lies?)
But this column was not just to have her drop a few names, and try to get a level of one-upmanship on the bloggers. No, like every other moron journalist out there that dislikes the bloggers (mostly because we end up showing these fools up, time and again), and she has decided to take a swipe at us.
The State of the News Media Report is an annual review by the Project for Excellence in Journalism, part of the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism in New York.
The conclusion of the 600-page report was that the traditional "journalism of verification," in which reporters check facts, is being infringed upon by a new model of journalism that is "faster, looser and cheaper."
Infringed upon? Well, no offense, but if journalists and editors did their jobs, the bloggers would be out of one. They would be relegated to covering little factoids from areas of America or around the globe that media services deem too small a story to bother with reporting it. (Like the big news story that Bill Clinton was offered 40 goats and 20 cows for his daughter’s hand in marriage to a tribal leader in Kenya. BTW, Bill said no, but asked what the guy could give him for Hillary. Can I please get a rimshot for that one?) The media enjoyed covering that little story of amusement, but they refuse to touch Mugabe in Zimbabwe slaughtering his population in what the UN sees as non-genocide genocide.
But, she goes on.
In the new "journalism of assertion," as the report calls it, information is offered with little time and little attempt to independently verify its voracity.
You have to love those editorial checks and balances. "Voracity" means to be in the state or quality of being voracious, which means ravenous. The MSM, as Captain Ed appropriately points out, is quite voracious when it comes to it’s reporting, and it’s bias. They ravenously attack and slander anyone on the right side of the ideological scale, and defend those on the Left side—the side that they agree with most—against any questions that may embarrass those allies.
I believe she meant to use the word "veracity" which means to be devoted to the truth, to be accurate, etc. This is something that the MSM does not abide to. If they did, they would not be caught in so many lies by the "journalism of assertion," as she and this ridiculous report calls bloggers. There is no assertion made by bloggers. We report the facts we have, and it comes with a level of in-depth research. Thomas and I have quite a few contacts we speak on a weekly basis to keep us updated on what is going on with a variety of subjects. From time to time, those contacts fail us. It is a part of life. We move forward with the facts we have in hand—verified as far as they will go—and should we be wrong, we post a correction. Bloggers are not often wrong on the right-center side of the blogosphere. The DailyKos kids on the other hand, well...that’s his problem, not ours.
In other words, bloggers and some radio and cable talk show hosts make up stories and spread rumors. Too often, consumers don't know the difference between these lies and mainstream news reports.
When we established this site, we made a commitment to each other and our readers that we would do our best to report fact, and not rumor. Now, over the Rehnquist retirement talk that was going on, Thomas had two sources confirming that the Chief Justice was stepping down. When he did not, Thomas apologized on our site. We try to hold the highest integrity possible. If we stumble or screw up, we lose readers. Those are the people we are ultimately beholden to. The MSM does not think that way. They know that, for the most part, their subscribers will still get their cage liner—day in and day out—like a gerbil hitting a feeder bar for it’s next meal.
And the consumers do know the difference between rumors and lies. The bloggers have handled more stories of prominent interest than the MSM has. The MSM gave Sen. Durbin a pass regarding his statements about Gitmo. They gave Indira Nooyi—PepsiCo’s COO—for comparing the US to the middle finger. They gave Dan Rather a pass over the Rathergate scandal. They give passes to anyone who shares their ideology, and they savage anyone they disagree with. That is when the consumer realized that something was not right with their trusted news services any longer. The news was no longer fair or balanced. It was no longer objective. It was slanted, and still is so.
The report on the threat to traditional journalism focused on political reporting - remember the allegations by the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" that, after weeks of reporting, were found to be unsubstantiated?
This is rich. An allegation would be an unproven accusation. To date, more information has come out about Sen. Kerry’s service record regarding his missions in Vietnam. Thomas did an outstanding column for a website "CommonConservative.com" that absolutely destroyed Kerry’s "Christmas-Not-In-Cambodia" story, and it was based—for the most part—on the technicalities of it. Kerry also claimed that he ran guns for the Khmer Rouge, which was proven to be false. The man was a liar, and the bloggers outed him as such to the point where Kerry finally shut his yap about those things because every time he opened his mouth about these subjects, the story kept changing. We should also remember the awards he was given, and how he swore up and down what they were, then later recanted on one of them—his Bronze Star, if memory serves me correctly.
The Cambodia story started with a CIA operative operating in Cambodia. Kerry supposedly received a "lucky hat" from the guy. The story, after enough people asked him to name the operative, changed to ferrying Navy SEALs up to Cambodia. This is a factual inaccuracy, as the SEALs never would have used a Swift Boat to go anywhere near what was enemy territory; their covert insertion would have been blown in an instant. Add to the fact that the SEALs NEVER used Swift Boats. They used the Navy Sea Wolves helicopter group and the Brown Water Navy. But, I guess we should not let FACTS get in the way of Ms. Clark’s uneducated rant against the bloggers, now should we? And this rant was much like the ones the MSM pulled out on the Swift Boat Vets, accusing them of attacking Kerry with no facts, despite the simple fact that the MSM could not prove them wrong.
In short, I would suggest to Ms. Clark that her and her lazy, biased ilk in the MSM better do some soul-searching, and I mean more than what the Democrats have done thus far after losing the last few elections. The public no longer regards the MSM as trustworthy. They no longer look to them for serious information, and those that have no choice take what the MSM with a grain of salt, and quite a bit of doubt. The media pushes an agenda on a daily basis and have polls to back up their assertions. But when you control the polls, how the questions are worded, and appeal only to those that do not pay as close attention to the news as others—like bloggers—do, then you are bound to end up with a public that is as equally ill-educated about things as the MSM is.
But, times are changing. People are walking away from the MSM. And they are walking right up to sites like Michelle Malkin’s, Hugh Hewitt’s, Captain’s Quarters, Drudge, and yes, even the little fish like us. But that is what makes us who we are. We do the checking the MSM does not do. We ask the questions that the monkeys in the media refuse to ask. And we are not afraid to get a little dirty in the process if that is what it takes to get out the facts. That is our job. The truth is for our readers to decide.
"Don’t hate me Trinity; I’m just the messenger."—The Matrix
The Bunny ;)
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 11:41 PM
1 Comments:
Good blog. I also follow sports and I've never heard of Nancy Clark. Me thinketh she needs some education. A fact is a fact is a fact, good bad or indifferent. One doesn't make up a fact. A very wise man once told us that one inference from a proven fact is permissible but any more is gossip or in law, hearsay. In other words an inference on an inference is nothing but gossip or as I have said spin. Rawriter
Post a Comment
<< Home