The Influence of Fools: Why Liberals are Mad at the MSM

[lady lib]

Published on Tuesday, May 10, 2005 by CommonDreams.org
The Influence of Fools:
Why Liberals are mad at the MSM
by John Atcheson

Long accustomed to the wrath from the right, the news media is now facing white hot anger from the left. For the most part, the press seems genuinely perplexed by this turn of events.

<snip>

We’re angry, ladies and gentlemen of the press, because for the last four years you’ve utterly failed to hold our leaders accountable to the truth.

<snip>

We’re angry, because when journalists make impartiality, objectivity and balance, more important than accuracy, context and truth, then once again you’re failing to fulfill the functions for which you were given First Amendment protections.

We’re angry because we believe that practicing journalism with integrity requires more of you than acting like a court stenographer; more than simply listening, recording, and printing. If the words you’re recording don’t jive with the truth, if you don’t think, don’t challenge, and don’t dig for more information, then politicians, being politicians, will tell ever bigger lies.

<snip>

Read in full:
http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/views05/0510-29.htm

Excellent.

[ihaveaquestion]

1. Great Article!

I was just about to post about it, but you beat me to it!

:toast:

[lady lib]

2. We're on the same wave length!

He really distills all the points we've been making at DU for months now.

:toast:

[Skinner]

3. That is a great read.

Thanks for posting. He nailed it.

[lady lib]

4. You're welcome

and thanks for the kick.

[Dr Ron]

5. Is the problem lazy journalism?

While there is definately bias, I don't think this is the major problem. (I'm speaking of real media, not the outright propaganda sources like Fox News, Washington Times, etc).

A large part of the problem might be in not doing enough real investigation. The party which is on the outside knows there is stuff going on wihch should be reported, but the mainstream media sticks to the establishment press conferences rather than doing real reporting.

[Cats Against Frist]

7. You also have to entertain the possibility that it's not lazy, at all

but, rather, a well-calculated and realized plan to purchase and infiltrate major media, on behalf of the right-wing "think tanks," such as Heritage and AEI.

It's not that the journalists might be lazy -- it's that they might be AEI operatives.

[arikara]

13. Yes, I think you may be right

but the most important thing to the corporate media is raking in their advertising dollars and that is where they are most vulnerable.

btw... I love your userid. I think its the best one I've seen yet.

[lady lib]

43. Yes. See my response #40.

[Arugula Latte]

14. Yes.

They've been "snatching bodies" for years -- easing out real journalists in favor of corporate lackeys who will toe the line.

It all came home to roost in the election of 2000. That's what shocked me like nothing else -- when I saw an election blatantly stolen and the media sitting on its hands, whistling. Nothing to see here, move along ...

Clinton got BJs from an intern, and that's all we heard about for years. Then democracy was unceremoniously flushed down the crapper and crickets were chirping ...

[hfojvt]

17. it was not just the theft

but also the way the media declared war on Gore while they shilled for the BFEE. Did Gore lie about his trip to Texas? Let's make this a big story. Did Bush lie with his claims of "fuzzy math"? Well, math is too boring and complicated and subject to debate. Who knows what the answer really is when you add and multiply a bunch of numbers? It is a non-story. Gore press releases on this matter? Bury them.

[lady lib]

25. Great imagery, Oregonian. n/t

[rndmprsn]

6. fantastic article...thanks for posting. NT

[otohara]

What's Sad

is...nothing changes.

My God, CNN gets worse by the day. The New York Times hires some idiot to replace Safire and in today's column, he suggests that the MSM stop reporting on the numerous "attacks" in Iraq. Heck, it worked in NYC when Guliani asked the press to stop w/ the reporting on crime in the city, so NY'ers would feel safer.

They are all so worried about being percieved as "liberal".

So to please the wingnuts, I can only assume the press will do what ever it takes to please the well organized right-wing.

[hfojvt]

18. Tierney is Safire's replacement?

I almost read that column, the teaser line did not say which way it went.
I thought Brooks was going to be the replacement for Safire. Who did he replace? Frank Rich?

[otohara]

24. Here Ya Go....

John Tierney's media credibility plan

It all makes sense to us now.

The problems in Iraq? The insurgency that won't go away, the Iraqi civilians and security forces and the U.S. troops who just keep dying? There's an explanation for it all, and John Tierney, Bill Safire's replacement on the op-ed page of the New York Times, sets it all out for us today.

It's the media's fault.

While Tierney says that he understands that the press has "a duty to report suicide bombings in the Middle East," he suggests that it's time for the press to stop, you know, reporting on them. Reporting out the details only helps the terrorists' "media strategy," Teirney says, and it's time for the press to stop playing along. Rather than getting details about the names and faces of the people who suffered, Tierney asks, wouldn't we all just be better off if the media gave us a "box score" on each suicide attack listing the number of dead and the size of the explosion? "I suspect the public would welcome a respite from gore," Tierney says.

He's surely right about that part: The public -- the American public and the Iraqi public -- would surely welcome a respite from the reports about the "gore." But what they'd welcome more would be a respite from the gore itself. Tierney doesn't offer up any ideas on how U.S. or Iraqi forces could put an end to the suicide bombings in Iraq; instead, he suggests -- without really suggesting -- that the U.S military stop giving reporters information about suicide attacks. Failing that, he says, reporters should "reconsider" their interest in providing readers the details.

The Bush administration must be pleased as punch with Teirney's suggestion; no news is good news when the war is going badly, and a sterile listing of casualities is a hell of a lot easier to ignore than pictures of bleeding children and grieving families. As a public relations measure from the Pentagon's perspective, Tierney's ideas make perfectly good sense. But what are they thinking at the New York Times? We know that there's a separation between the news division and the op-ed page. But for a paper that seems so concerned about restoring credibility with readers, Tierney's column -- with its suggestion that the government supress the news and that the press do so if the government won't -- is still a strange way to start

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/index.html

for more indepth on this
http://mediamatters.org/items/200505090003

[Lydia Leftcoast]

34. Yeah, it's the media's fault

If the media hadn't kept reporting on U.S. casualties and stuff, we would have won in Vietnam. Or so I heard repeatedly. :eyes:

[Daphne08]

37. It's the truth

and I'm old to know. ;)

[dissent1977]

8. It is the CORPORATE media

We really need to stop talking about the "mainstream media". Does anyone on this site honestly believe that FOX News represents the mainstream? What about CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC or any of the other corporate sources for that matter?

They don't represent the mainstream, they represent their corporate owners. When we say they are mainstream we are giving them credibility they do not deserve. Please change the language.

[anitar1]

12. Thank You, dissent1977, My opinion exactly. n/t

[lady lib]

26. You're right.

We need a catchy shorthand to replace MSM. Something like CSM for corporate shill media.

[JDPriestly]

9. Atcheson speaks for me!

[Bluzmann57]

10. We all know that sex and sensationalism sells

so imagine how "sensational" it would be if the media mopes uncovered the truth about the bush administration's high crimes and misdemeanors. And I also want it known that if one or more Democrats do something illegal, then that should also be reported on. But since bush is the (alleged) president, the press should zero in on everything he says and dissect it with a fine tooth comb, so to speak. If it is proven that he and his partners in cri...er administration people are telling the truth (HA!) then so be it. But since a person sitting on their rear end at a computer can uncover things, why can't a professional journalist? One who has access to some of the finest high tech equipment in the world, as well as education. C'mon media people, get your heads out of your collective asses and do some REPORTING! Remember Woodward and Bernstein, among others. Remember all the awards they won and all the money they made. We should constantly bombard the media outlets of this country and remind them of that.

[ihaveaquestion]

21. They (the repukes) have point men and women who are out there

making themselves targets by spouting off ridiculous and outrageous propaganda that everyone knows is propaganda, but it gets attention. Folks like Coulder, Limbug, Fallingwell, and Herr Robertson are out there getting attention and taking the heat for their ridiculousness. They are clowns, but they GET THE MEDIA'S ATTENTION!!!!!!

Then the so-called "cooler heads" of the republican elite are given time and space on TV and radio and asked about the outrageous stuff the clowns have said and they get their views aired.

The clowns are the foot in the door of the media. We need more clowns on our side willing to take the heat for their outrageousness, so they can open the doors for the cooler heads of the liberal elite. It's all just theater - Vaudeville! - and it ain't gonna change. WE - Dems/Liberals/Progressives NEED TO ADAPT TO THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION!!!!

END OF RANT
:rant:

[EvolvedChimp]

11. Sometimes I feel like. . .

The right-wings have a picture of Paula Zahn blowing Anderson Cooper. That would explain CNN's fall into the Dark side

[Nothing Without Hope]

15. The GOOD news is that they are starting to notice that we are PISSED

They want to keep their audience - their clients - happy enough to stay with them. Traditionally, the freepers and conservative wackos have been the ones organizing media write-in campaigns to express outrage and threaten dire conseuqences when they didn't toe the neocon party line. And of course, the administration prefers it that way too and they have influence with all too many owners and editors.

But WE are a major audience too and polls show that the MAJORITY of American citizens oppose many policies of this administration that the media have been all to compliant with. Maybe they SAY they're "perplexed," but the fact is, they are starting to hear more from the TRUE silent majority.

But it's an uphill fight and we have to keep media=blasting like mad. And there is backsliding. Look at what an "internal review" says about the "too liberal" New York Times:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1458568
And then do more than worry, WRITE TO THEM. Their refusal to tell the truth has major consequences and they need to hear from us. Lovely to see the headline in your OP: "Why liberals are mad at the MSM" - but the fact is, IT'S MORE THAN JUST THE "LIBERALS" WHEN THIS TERM IS CODE FOR NON-CONSERVATIVE. We represent the MAJORITY in many issues, and need to remind them of that. Often.

Here are DU threads with lists of media contact info:

Skinner's list of national media emails, from the Media Forum. These are not formatted for inserting multiples into an mail program, but they do have some explanation and are alphabetical:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=109x17759

This thread is from the Activism Forum and includes many fax numbers and addresses:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=106&topic_id=8816#9153

[lady lib]

27. Thanks for all the info.

:hi:

[Ysolde]

16. I totally agree

But, it is more of the insidious problem of corporate control of everything. The largest corporations control the "MSM" and they are doing everything they can to keep the masses ignorant and uninformed so that they can continue their rape and pillage of the entire world.

[lady lib]

28. Hi Ysolde. Welcome to DU.

B-)

[Ysolde]

44. Thanks for the welcome.

I've lurked here for a while now, but I'm just not a good writer (get lost in the details and can't describe things so viscerally). That's why I had to respond to your letter. It was fabulous. I really like DU and NEED it -- live in OK.

[lady lib]

45. Yes, John Atcheson, the author, really nailed it.

(and I'll bet you're a better writer than you give yourself credit for.)

[UCLA Dem]

19. Awesome. I love it!

[Serial Mom]

20. Excellent!

I worked for a paper a while back and what I am seeing now is also lazy journalism, especially in print media.

They are so worried about keeping up with the "immediate" news, they don't bother to check facts even for local news. They attend a local meeting and just report what happened - why go then? Get the minutes of the meeting.

If at the meeting they approved something like spending money or offering city workers a pension plan, check it out with experts, see if what these politicians are proposing makes sense, then report on your findings 2,3 or even 4 days later.

INFORM THE PUBLIC - that is what they used to do, now they just write down words they hear and claim that is reporting. All for the sake of their employers bottom line.

(on edit - spelling)

[lady lib]

29. It helps to get perspective from people like you

who've worked in journalism.

[hfojvt]

22. they are shills, not stenographers

They do not just pass on what Bush says, they actively promote it, pretending to be objective investigators with intelligent, informed positions. They are dues paying (or check receiving) members of the Republican Noise Machine - spewing out lies and misinformation and spin to advance the BFEE agenda.

[ooglymoogly]

23. boy howdy

tell it straight

[nashville_brook]

30. wow -- what a great article!

THESE are the debates we should be having:

"There is an intellectual case to be made for smaller government, an unconstrained private sector, and an economy that is single-mindedly built around rewarding success and ignoring those who fall by the wayside. And there is a perspective that shares John Bolton’s vision of a US as having a responsibility to use its military might aggressively and unilaterally throughout the world. And its conceivable that there’s a case to be made for imposing environmental devastation and multi-trillion dollar debts upon our children."

how wonderful if we could only have these debates -- in the MSM -- seems like an impossible dream.

[Parrcrow]

31. Great piece

Thanks for the link!

[kliljedahl]

32. Just copied & printed it

TYVM


Keith’s Barbeque Central

[jmcon007]

33. I remember a high school basketball referee who

was intelligent and fair-minded by nature, but he found trouble in refereeing junior high basketball games.
He would make an iffy call for one side, get booed, and then would try and make up for it by making another borderline call for the other side. Before you knew it, everyone was booing him.
The obvious point and analogy is that Rove has EVERYONE cowed and worried about their jobs and that includes the press.

I think is was Nathan Hale who said he regretted he only had one life to give for his country. Can we find anyone willing to place his or her job in danger?

Would we?

[lady lib]

40. Okay, I can agree with you that individual reporters are

feeling pressure to tow the line in order to keep their jobs. Yes. But the scale of what we're seeing suggests collusion at the very highest levels of corporate media. Why? Money and access. These corporations answer to their stockholders first and therefore put profit above the ideal of an informed and enlightened electorate. Furthermore, the WH threatens to limit access to any news organizations that ask tough questions and show signs of independent thought.

So what can we do? We can try to convince corporate media owners (and their shareholders) that there is a higher calling to news in a free society that goes beyond profit, and that they must start to challenge the administration during press conferences (acting as a group - the WH can't throw them all out). OR, we can accept that they are comfortable with the status quo and instead continue to develop our own media that conforms to our ideals, and to make that ideal profitable so that it has a viable future.

And maybe Griffy can give us more ideas after the conference.

IMHO.

Edit: Another option is to show corporate media how to make a profit from real news by throwing our collective viewership and $$$ behind those organizations that perform at the level we expect.

[Griffy]

35. EXACTLY.. I'm so mad I am GOING to the conference!

I am going to see whats up and tell some truth! I'm bringing the laptop and I hope to report in from there! well see...


http://www.freepress.net/conference/

[lady lib]

39. Good for you!

It looks like registration is now closed, so those of us who didn't get a chance to sign up will be looking forward to reading your updates.

[nittygritty]

36. my letters to 10 MSMs (local and national) going out tomorrow (snailmail):

To Whom It May Concern,

Why is it that the mainstream (dare I say corporate?) media continues to ignore the blatant lies and scandals that the Bush administration continues to propagate? This makes the media complicit in the continuation of ignorance and apathy among Americans, especially with regard to the truth about the War in Iraq.

Those of us who make a concerted effort to stay on top of the truth have to resort to picking up fragments of facts here and there from many different mainstream sources in order to “connect the dots”. It is also resulting in a turning towards “other” alternative news sources such as blogs and foreign media. The migration of people from mainstream media to alternative news sources is growing exponentially.

Is there a media “blackout” in the U.S.? Are mainstream media outlets now controlled by corporate, pro-Bush interests? Or have they just become spineless bastions of “info-tainment” (Michael Jackson, Runaway Bride, etc.) as a result of the persistent hammering accusations by neo-conservatives of a “liberal media”? Is there a gradual, vicious cycle of “dumbing-down” of Americans by mainstream media as a result of relying so heavily upon ratings? Is this why investigative journalism seems to have all but disappeared and what we get instead is sensationalized non-news and/or gossip?

Whichever it is, it is SHAMEFUL! And whichever it is, mainstream media bears the responsibility of bringing objective, investigative journalism to the people, no matter the ratings. THERE IS A WAR HAPPENING, FOLKS! People are dying. American soldiers are dying, despite Bush’s barring the media from photographing the coffins rolling into Dover Air Force Base. Iraq is a quagmire - many soldiers returning from Iraq are being open about this. And the reasons why this whole war happened remain VERY questionable. The search for WMD’s in Iraq is now officially over and we all know the results of that search. Some of us knew what those results would be before this war was begun. But cooler heads did not prevail. Lies beat out logic.

Mainstream media is failing us and democracy – and now our democracy is failing because of it. It is way past time for the truth!

Sincerely,

[lady lib]

41. Appreciate your effort. n/t

[ihaveaquestion]

46. Excellent letter!

Will you update us if you get responses?

:bounce:

[Daphne08]

38. Fantastic piece!!

Thanks for posting it.

[lady lib]

42. To all of you who thanked me for posting this -

a great big YOU'RE WELCOME. Taking on big media is a group effort and I think we have a great start here at DU.

:hi: