Congrats, New Media: Journalism Is Back
The story is not the photos. The story is the journalism — It’s back. And the MSM is finished.
As Weinergate broke and gained traction, a large majority of the MSM and leftist media stuck their heads in the sand. Joan Walsh of Salon.com savaged those who attempted to make this a story. On MSNBC, she seemed furious at Chris Matthews who — to his credit — would not let Walsh tie the reporting of Weinergate to the case involving Breitbart and Shirley Sherrod.
Others decided this is not a news story — it bores them. Former Clinton administration big-shot Paul Begala quipped to Anderson Cooper while pretending to yawn: “Wake me when we have a real sex scandal.”
As of this writing, Joan Walsh and the team at Salon have written numerous pieces about the press conference and Breitbart … and are still emphasizing the arcane message that Breitbart can’t be trusted. Alex Pareene states:
Andrew: You will get no apology from us — or from me at least! — because sometimes even complete frauds get lucky. I don’t apologize to Glenn Beck the twice a year he’s right about something, either.
At the Huffington Post, New York editor-at-large Dan Collins talked about Nancy Pelosi’s displeasure with Weiner, but mentioned nothing about Weiner’s lying. Collins made sure to note:
No, it’s not the cover-up. It’s Weiner’s idiotic behavior.
Yes, Dan Collins, it is the cover-up, and not from Weiner but from a complicit MSM that refuses to engage in journalism. “Weinergate” is simply the latest example of how the MSM is failing us, and how New Media has filled the vacuum. Take a look at the entire Breitbart organization: they brought us James O’Keefe, who exposed ACORN and exposed NPR’s willingness to take money from a Muslim Brotherhood front group — while badmouthing the Tea Party. (The scandal forced the resignation of CEO Vivian Schiller, who was then promptly employed by NBC!) It was Breitbart who taught us all about the Pigford settlement, the corruption of the system by takers and hucksters, and the plight of real black farmers who were left in the cold, sold out for the “reparations” of others.
I am proudly affiliated with New Media force PJM (I write for PJM, and I host a show on PJTV): here, J. Christian Adams showed us how the New Black Panther case was tossed by the DOJ — a case whose handling was so repulsive that Adams resigned and turned whistleblower because of it. Patrick Poole’s investigative reporting led Rep. Peter King (R-NY) to launch an investigation into Attorney General Eric Holder’s handling of terrorism persecution.
And it was Pajamas Media and contributor Farid Ghadry providing the inside account of the real story — and horrific bloodshed — in Syria.
This should serve as a warning to the ruling class that your sins will find you out sooner or later.
The citizen soldier won our freedom from oppressive tyrant. Now the citizen journalist will win it back.
This truly was the moment when the “new” media came of age.
By the way, the new media IS the mainstream media. Everything else is, as Ace puts it the “make-believe-media” (MBM).
There is New Media and then there is Soros media. There is truth and then there are lies. Brietbart’s truth telling is outperforming Soros money propoganda old media . Thanks Mr Weiner for the tipping point.
rush, drudge, and brietbart need their heads carved in a mountain
…that should read Rush, Drudge and Brietbart, with bountiful flowing red, white, and blue capes…
….hey, why doesn’t someone hack into that that famous crawling “News” sign at TIMES (!) Square, and run this story there…then ….wait for the…. Gasps! from the pedestrians, then the honking horns (..Noo Yawk style..) ….cries of, “LOOK! Look!….up on that building!…..it’s…it’s….th’….REAL NEWS!….Yaaaaay!”.
i’m not ready to declare new media a success. there’s a lot of opinion on the internet that doesn’t qualify as good journalism, IMO.
At least with new media you are allowed to make that judgement.
There’s a lot of opinion in the legacy media that doesn’t count as good journalism either.
Charlie….you’re trying to justify ‘commentary’ as journalism…are you not? If only the boys down at the pool hall were alive today to find out they were journalists and not really cowboys and farmers! As for ‘opinionators’ the last time I checked there were as many of them, as there are butt holes. The only difference between yesteryear and today is that most today, lack the will and ability to be independently informed and independently reason through the ‘real’ news of the day….thus, they lazily rely upon biased and in many cases, self-serving commentator and opinionator sources.
Then what, may I ask, are you doing commenting on a site such as this? Draw you own conclusions, goat-boy.
There is a sense of excitement present in members of the new conservative media. It is fun to play offense and bust down a monopoly. Everything is new and there are no established guidelines. \
Enjoy the ride!!!!
Ya know who Breitbart reminds me of? (This just occurred to me…)
Maybe you’ll or he’ll be offended but….. Abbie Hoffman.
Both of them are revolutionary showmen. Both are genuinely jovial happy warriors, who don’t shy away from the arena, but sprint right into it with swords and fists swinging. Both are zeroing in on the established powers, holding them in contempt and saying to them essentially “Your enemy?? You BET I’m your enemy! And I’m gonna win!” Both could not care less what that same establishment says about them, they know they are on the right side.
And both represent a genuine cutting edge of the zeitgeist, whose attacks on the establishment are likely headed for eventually taking it over (at least to some extent).
If Breitbart’s ideals can have even half the resonance of Abbie Hoffman’s from 1965-1980, there may be hope for us yet.
Soldier on, Tony! (and Andrew)
Without the internet, we would have already been enslaved under cap and trade. Thank God for the INTERNET.
Sure, I’m plenty displeased with the MSM, and I’ve sung “The MSM is finished” more than a few times myself.
But as long as the MSM pleases half the country, as well as more than half the elites, Hollywood, and academia, the MSM is far from finished. It will decades to dismantle these tangeled knots of power and privilege.
I’m not so sure – as Elisa pointed out this is largely brought about by the internet, and the information flows as quickly as your computer’s processor will allow. When I graduated college in 2001, my roomate and I felt privileged to have a dial-up intenet connection even though it tied up the apartment’s land line (I didn’t have a cell phone either at the time). If knowledge is power, the MSM loses eponentially more of it with each passing day. We now have an enormous a la carte from which to choose the news stories and outlets we prefer. In each of the Breitbart cases, the media eventually ended up reluctantly having to follow a narrative they didn’t necessarily want, which would have been unthinkable just 10 years ago.
Herman Cain for President!!
Jason: Progress is being made. The rapid growth of the Tea Party and the massive Republican wins in 2010 are evidence. I’d love to be surprised.
But when it comes to political beliefs, knowledge isn’t power. It’s an opportunity to revise one’s beliefs, but most people are content to ignore information that would require them to change.
I think this is more of a generational thing as in Kuhn’s “Structure of Scientific Revolutions.” It took decades for the WW II generation to fade away and be replaced by Boomers, who are now at the peak of their power. It will take decades for Boomers to be replaced by your generation.
Incidentally, I believe that Americans of your generation will be the ones who break the back of the MSM, as they become aware that they are bearing the brunt of our entitlement society, as Boomers retire.
I tend to agree with you mostly, but I sincerely believe the internet has changed the game completely, speeding up the dispersal of information, leaving the MSM way behind the curve. One example is the Santorum plea that went viral on the internet, sparking the discussion we are having today about the role of government. Tea Partiers were scoffed at, called names, and reviled with the help of CNN, NBC and the like, and today, only a year and a half later, their central theme has become mainstream, with those same outlets now running stories on the danger of debt and deficits. 15 years ago the MSM simply would not have allowed this to happen. The 2010 elections would have never happened and we would still be speeding full-steam towards the cliff. The place where information is still as liberally filtered as ever is in the classroom. The MSM has become a clown car chasing the reportage of citizen journalists in a futile attempt to remain relevant, as the wake of crybaby MSM journalists behind Palin’s bus has so perfectly symbolized. They are done – next stop The Department of Education.
Anybody who finds it a ‘need’ to rely upon the [internet] and its thousands of biased pundits for thier knowledge about anything, represents a very lazy person. With todays technology you can watch and listen to much of whats going on in congress and the executive…first-hand. You can get on the mailing lists of any party, any department, agency or corporation of the government. You can access every public document generated from the government to read and analyze. Every legislator makes themselves available to discuss in-person, whatever may be on your mind… and on down the list.
Todays generations not only lack the will but also the ability to independently think and reason, regardless, of all the sheepskins they display on their walls. [ALL] political sites have personal biased agendas! Most have an ideological agenda first and foremost and some include hawking their wares such as published books and miscellaneous junk. A good test as to any sites validity is this measure. See how much of their intellectual time is spent ‘identifying’ already known problems versus attempting to create a comprehensive resolve to any identified problems. See how much of their ‘resource’ materials are actual and factual official documents versus authored books and factually unsupported biased materials.
The MSM has a prominent Achilles Heel that can be exploited. With all kinds of media seeing falling revenues, MSM is hanging on until the 2012 election when billions of dollars will enrich their coffers as they spread lies across the nation. We, the American people can pull a Jesse Jackson by boycotting all forms of MSM beginning two months before the election. Most of us don’t like them anyhow so we stand to lose what ?? Comics – Sports ?? With a drastically reduced subscriber base, MSM loses their strong suit with those who place the ads we all hate to see and the obvious result will be far fewer ads and, probably, more of the MSM group folding their tents and slinking off into the netherworld from whence they sprung.
I dropped print media and cable over 2 years ago and haven’t regretted it one bit. The local paper nearly cried when I cancelled my subscription and GOT A REBATE for the unpaid balance. I told them “Why should I pay for bad news?” We can now add inaccurate, incomplete, and biased to “bad.”
Few people expected the former Soviet Union to collapse so rapidly and so thoroughly, but it did.
The MSM doesn’t please so many people any more – which is why its audience and its revenues are declining so rapidly.
Another nail in the coffin of the legacy media. The New Media is the future of journalism. The legacy media is only interested in perpetuating their liberal narrative and anything that conflicts with that doesn’t get reported. They are the buggy whip industry in the early 20th century.
Theres ‘nothing’ legitimate or admirable about Andrew Breitbart and his kind. His only game is personal attention and money. He swims around in every cesspool where everybody knows theres no shortage of turds and declares every found turd a matter of national interest….only if he can make a dime for the turd.
If it takes an Andrew Breitbart to inform the nation that its people, social and political pundits and government are a broken and corrupted, there is no hope for the future.
Breitbart and his accomplises including the punditry and other media, are nothing more than ‘personal’ assassins for ‘personal’ gain, having little to nothing to do with solving the nations real problems.
Kind of like preachers who teach their flocks that they’re born sinners and then spend the rest of their lives sitting in judgement, condemning their fellow man as imperfect and sinners…….
Has any of this obsession over Rep Wiener’s ‘weenie’ advanced any solutions to the nations real problems?
You and Matt Damon should form a club. You could call it Perversity Matters – NOT!
Have you even looked at Brietbarts site? Here is today’s Big Government stories. Seems the Dems aren’t too happy with Wiener either.
1. Pelosi formally requests Weiner ethics probe
2. Report: Anthony Weiner coached woman to lie
3. N.Y. Post: Weiner and Nevada woman exchanged raunchy messages, planned to meet
4. Eric Cantor calls on Rep. Weiner to resign
5. Reid: ‘I wish there was some way I can defend him but I can’t’
6. Carville: Dems ‘Really Mad at Him’
7. Ed Shultz Returns, Calls for Weiner’s Resignation
8. Matt Damon Hasn’t Given Up on Anthony Weiner
9. Wire: Voters say Weiner can survive lewd photo scandal
10. Atlantic: Half of New Yorkers Hope Weiner Resigns
11. Rush Does Weinergate Act I Post-Mortem
12. Scandal puts wife, Hillary Aide Huma Abedin in the spotlight
13. Salon: The dirty trick that launched Anthony Weiner’s career
14. Walsh: Behold the Face of the Modern Left
15. Breitbart on TODAY: Big Gov’t Publisher Tells Incredible Story Behind Weiner Presser
16. Breitbart in NY TIMES: Conservative Tipsters ‘know I’m willing to march through the fire with them’
17. Watch: Breitbart’s ‘Hannity’ Interview on Weinergate
18. Big Journalism: ‘Big’ Blogs Scoop MSM Yet Again
19. Order Breitbart’s Book: ‘Righteous Indignation: Excuse Me While I Save the World!’
I’m sure you would be proud to call someone like Wiener your son in law. I feel sorry for your daughters if you have any or will some day.
Brad,
Well done! Can I use your comment on my PJTV show, The Conversation with Tony Katz?
– Tony
Tony….["Well done! Can I use your comment on my PJTV show..."]
How pathetic but, indicative of todays generations. Not a shred of noteworthy headline news on that list and you get an errection. Furthermore, show me anything on the list that is generated by your hero Breitbar. The [only] independent works by Breitbart is in the sewers as a petty assassin for personal gain.
The socialist-progressives have got to be loving such fools for distracting their flocks from the real news and problems of the day.
Tony
It would be my pleasure! Let me know when I can tune in and watch.
Brad
Sounds like you are just fine with the status quo – corrupt politicians who “play the game” and indulge in all of its degenerate trappings. I would welcome a closer look into the character of all of our politicians, R and D alike. Why is your party loyalty so blind and rigid that you would allow yourself to be represented by a morally void huckster? In liberal circles, maybe it’s acceptable to cheat on your spouse and use taxpayer dollars to facilitate it? Is Anthony Weiner really the best representative available for the people of his district? Shouldn’t someone with the privelege of being a United States representative be held to a higher standard of conduct than sending juvenile pictures of his genetalia to little girls? I suspect it matters not to you so long as there is a “D” next to his name. Truly pathetic partisan hackery.
Jason…I’ve been a republican longer than you’ve probably been on earth (1952). Before that I was a part of the ‘old’ democrat party.
When we send our boys off to war do you want them to be moral philosophers or dedicated trained killers?
No doubt you know more about politics and government than I, but last time I checked, there was an all out ideological war taking place in the halls of congress and in the Executive branch. Now, you might find that a congress persons genitals and other subjective indiscretionary actions in their personal lives defines the standard of serving in Washington. If you do, Washington would be a ghost town and nobody but through a lie would be serving there. Short of any factual indications that laws were broken, the constitution provides for a couple of separate processes….a congressional process, a voters process and individual community rights to define certain morality issues. Once a situation comes to the general publics attention it should be left to the constitutional processes….not a bunch of hypocritical media pundits and general public with biased ‘political’ motives acting as judges, juries and executioners.
Do I wish that there was far more traditional morality? Sure! But the newer generations have overwhelmingly, regardless of political party, decided that there should be little morality other than in their public hypocritical rhetoric.
So, in the face of reality give me a legislator that will fight to defend our homeland, prudently spend the nations bounty, fight to restore the constitution and work hard to fix the problems that they, the government creates….and I will overlook any of their human shortcomings in their personal lives void of violating the written laws of the land. In these times, I want on-the-job warriors, not hypocritical moral philosophers on my battlefield in Washington!
T.T. Thomas
I’ll take you at your word about being a Republican since 1952, but I really must disagree with everything you say and the way your brain works.
Sexual picadillos should only become a congressional issue if/when there is a clear ethics violation. Sadly for Weiner, he opened that door all on his own when he lied about the photo, said he was hiring a lawyer and computer expert to find out who hacked his account and attempted to besmirch the character of Brietbart for his role in it. At the very least Weiner is guilty of committing libel. Had Weiner come out and said at the very beginning, yea, that’s my penis, so what, mind your own business, congress would have nothing to do with this as they shouldn’t.
Culturally, I fear for our country when men in their 50′s or 60′s, who purport to be of a conservative bent, come out and say that basically, whatever sick and depraved thing our elected officials do is not our business, but theirs and theirs alone. Oh contrare monfrare! Our elected officials represent a constituency. A constituency who can hold them to any standard they choose. Weiner made his willy a target the second he decided to engage in reckless, immoral behavior. Why is it important that our reporters keep track of these morons and let the rest of us know when they do this kind of idiotic stuff? Let me tell you.
1. It displays poor judgement
2. It displays narcistic behavior
3. It exposes immoral actions
4. It let’s us know whether they’re focused on the job at hand, no pun intended, or not.
5. It exposes them to blackmail
6. Most important of all, IT REVEALS CHARACTER, or the lack there of in Weiner’s case.
Finally, you hammered Brietart pretty hard but failed to provide any evidence what so ever that he is a “personal assasin”. As for the “personal gain” aspect of your comment, please, he’s not allowed to make a living? I want clear examples where Brietbart exposed someone doing something stupid where it turns out Brietbart was wrong! Failure to produce this evidence completely undermines your accusation.
Brad…its hard for some of todays generations to face the realities of the society they have molded. Bottomline! You want the nation to function within your own hypocritical standards. That said, you’re not alone! The churches are filled each Sunday with self perceived purist hypocrits casting condemnation towards others. The ranks of the GOP’s ‘religious right’ who now label themselves as “conservatives” have time and agin proven themselves to be hypocritic failures in morality. The ratio of U.S. traffic to internet porn sites dwarfs any other coutry’s traffic. I could go on and on but the reality is, that Americas newer generations, todays overwhelming majority, republicans, democrats, independents and libertarians, redefined what they wish to be the nations moral standards.
For anybody to ‘demand’ that only miraculous puritans serve in the government denies human nature, biblical teachings and furthermore, is hypocrtical. Thats reality! Our nation is suposed to stand upon the foundation of the constitution and the laws and processes granted by the constitution. As such, and until it is proven that laws were broken, the matter of Rep. Weiner, once his acts were disclosed acruately or inaccurately to the public, it becomes a matter between he and the congressional process and the voters of his district.
Aside from the hypocricial aspects, to attempt to influence and effect any other process and outcome is unconstitutional. I supose in reality, there is no shortages of folks who will cherry-pick the constitution just as they do scriptures from the Bible for any number of self-serving motives they chose.
If you demand purism in government service beyond the qualifications established by the constitution, then maybe you should run since it appears you’re a purified human. I’ll look for you and Jesus standing at the right hand of God one day.
“If it takes an Andrew Breitbart to inform the nation that its people, social and political pundits and government are a broken and corrupted, there is no hope for the future.”
T3, it has always been this way. Who do you think the “great” Journalists were? Were they for “Truth, Justice, and the American Way?” Hardly.
The difference is that Breitbart’s chosen media is unusual. The old line media moguls have grown soft. Breitbart is pushing an edgy kind of Journalism that has been the hallmark of US culture since the founding of this country.
As for the situation, well, this isn’t about sex. If a man can’t take his marital vows seriously; what chance do we have that he’ll take anything else, including his oath of office, seriously? This is quite relevant.
I do not expect perfection from my politicians. I expect honesty. Andrew Breitbart is one of many in a long line of muckrakers going back centuries.
Kudos to him and his profession.
Gork….I’ll leave most of your comments to the purists who will be standing alongside Jesus at the right hand of God.
However, your comment ["If a man can’t take his marital vows seriously; what chance do we have that he’ll take anything else, including his oath of office, seriously? This is quite relevant."] I will challenge!
Do you have any connection to the Constitution? Can you show me where, in the constitution, your comment is a valid prerequisite? [Article I, Section 2...No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.]. [Article I, Section 5....Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.]
Do you see in the constitution any place that says it shall be granted to political pundits, political activists and the nations people at-large to dictate the process or potential punishiment or expulsion of a duly elected and sitting house representative?
So much for the mantra of I’m a constitutionalist republican/TeaPartier! For pundits and their following to try to influence and effect a means of process and outcome contrary to the constitution, is…. unconstitutional!
TT you miss the point completely. None of us are running for congress, holding ourselves out as a representative of the goodness in the constituents we would represent. The hypocrites are the ones who hold office, wag their fingers at others, and then engage in a level of decency that certainly falls in the bottom quartile of the very people they represent. Normal folks simply don’t have time for the juvenile shenanigans of an Anthony Weiner or a Mark Foley and most normal, grown, married men would never take a camera, snap a picture of his own genetalia, and send it to a little girl he met on the internet. If I am wrong then we are in bigger trouble as a society than I thought. My own personal baggage would never allow me to hold national office, and I will therefore never enjoy the power, influence, and wealth that our national leaders receive once we elect them to office. I don’t think it’s hypocritical at all to hold the people we elect to a higher standard. If someone told the average man that he would enjoy unimaginable power, influence, and wealth, and all he had to do was stay true to his wife for a few years, maybe quit smoking or stop looking at internet porn, it would be a no-brainer for most. Why are you so easily satisfied being represented by mediocrity?
You’re attacking Andrew Breitbart in order to provide political cover for a liar and a flasher whose hard-left ideology has been destroying the country. The self-righteousness these days is all from the left, and I’m sick of it.
I forgot to ask you: Do you work for Jesse Lee?
How many of us would take a proverbial “bullet” for this man? A man of uncompromising principles? A man who seeks to root out the lies, obfuscations, corruption, deviousness, degenerates, liars, filthy commie organizations like CAIR, SEIU, ACORN…and evil thieving bureaucrats like the “We willy weeners and Cherry Sherrods” of the world?
Not that I think any mortal man is a saint…nor can he be. But he’s the closest GD thing to a modern Paul Revere, an ultimate patriot that this country has today. Maybe a reincarnation of Ole Joe McCarthy who warned us of the red, commie, diaper baby scum and after all these years of scorn…was proved right.
They’re still here in the form of the Penns, Sarandons, Mahers, Moores, Sharptons, Jacksons, Damons and Cornel Wests of our world.
They laugh, mock and denigrate women by calling them sluts ( Laura ) twats and C**ts when they’re conservative women. The Bachmans, Palins, and the Michele Malkins of the world.
They never defend womens rights in the barbaric dungholes of Arabia or anywhere in the Middle East. And they call themselves…”enlightened or progressives”!
These scum…these so called “journalists”…are our true enemies. The socialists….the segregationists, the party of slavery and misogyny …the parasites and ultimate killers of our country.
Major….if you need some “man of uncompromising principles” such a Breitbart to inform you of whats going on around you…thats mighty sad!
As to your comment of a “man of uncompromising principles” I find that rather interesting, especially, as you define his uncompromising principles as “A man who seeks to root out the lies, obfuscations, corruption, deviousness, degenerates, liars, filthy commie……
Major….if you need some “man of uncompromising principles” such a Breitbart to inform you of whats going on around you…thats mighty sad!
As to your comment of a “man of uncompromising principles” I find that rather interesting, especially, as you define his uncompromising principles as “A man who seeks to root out the lies, obfuscations, corruption, deviousness, degenerates, liars, filthy commie……
Seems your boat may well be ruderless! I can provide you with a lengthy list of those things on the GOP side and durn if I ever remember your hero Breitbart being the person to expose any of them. Are you certain you want to stick with your “uncompromising principles” claims?
Palin is right. Ignore the MSM. Turn them into outcasts among conservatives. Newt Gingrich’s campaign was assassinated by that jerk on NBC. Newt called him out…said his question was “bizarre”.
These people must be confronted everytime they ask a have you stopped beating your wife yet? question. Let the whole world see them for the leftwing hacks they are.
The new media’s real challenge will come in November 2012, when it will become clear that millions of illegal voters will give Obama the victory.
Don’t be surprised if he then does to opposition Journalists what Vladimir Putin has done for 10+ years.
I hope you are ready for winter in the Aleutians.
I disagree that the MSM is finished, but they have definitely been put on notice. New media is watching you and you WILL be held accountable every time you drop the ball. If that keeps up, the yes, in the near future, the MSM will be finished.
The MSM, most of it, does not have an agenda – except to make money. If you don’t make money you can’t afford the ink. They have a tried and true method of attracting eyeballs that they sell to advertisers. Their editorial content and politics are not intended to educate or inform, nor to change opinions. They are there to attract a particular market segment. There is a huge amount of confirmation bias in what people pay attention to.
A large part of their success was the result of severely limited competition. Printing presses are expensive. The limited number of TV channels kept the eyeballs on them. People like to watch and read. With limited options they’ll pick the least unsatisfactory. Think of what kind of stuff you read in waiting rooms.
The reason that new media is strangling them is that with vastly increased bandwidth and vastly reduced production costs their markets are fragmenting. They have a huge amount of sunk capital in assets that no longer make money. They are very large organizations that are institutionally incapable of adjusting to this new world.
This is a prime cause of the sniping at the new politics by the purportedly conservative pundits and the Republican old guard. Their world is crumbling around them and they’re fighting like hell for their very lives.
Then why, Roy, are they deliberately squashing stories like Weinergate? It has everything that makes a wonderful splash… sex, politics, married men involved with unmarried college girls… but they had to be dragged kicking and screaming to it.
Now, contrast that with the Christopher Lee story and tell me again there’s no agenda.
Dear Wanderer,
Again, money. They know their audience. If they don’t they start circling the drain. The whole effort is to keep the eyeballs glued. If they run stuff that offends the confirmation bias of that particular audience they reach for the remote. The remote is the devil incarnate for TV executives. It’s too easy for the eyeballs to get away.
Regards,
Roy
Once again, Roy, your assertions fly in the face of the available evidence.
Looked at the broadcast TV news ratings recently?
How about cable news? How are CNN and MSNBC doing against Fox News?
Oh, and then there’s circulation figures for reliably lefty papers like the New York Times, not to mention Time and Newsweek. Tell me, how much was the media powerhouse Newsweek worth when it sold last?
If that’s a successful money-making strategy, I’d hate to seen an unsuccessful one.
Dear Wanderer,
Businesses and industries come and go all of the time. Many of the big brand names from my younger days are gone. Tried to buy a rotary phone lately? In the vernacular this is called “creative destruction”. When the old tractor won’t pull the plow you get a new one.
This is the point I made in my original comment. It WAS an effective business strategy. Time and tide have collected their tribute. They’re going kicking and screaming. But they’re going.
Regards,
Roy
There are none so blind as those that will not see.
Look, Roy, if–as you postulate–the Dinosaur Media’s only agenda was making money, they’d have moved away from their current self-destructive business plan long ago and turned to a more profitable one… like maybe dumping the lefty slant and just reporting the news with as little bias as humanly possible.
The fact that they haven’t after being in decline for many years shows that they’re either too stupid to realize that they’re in a death spiral, or that there’s another agenda at work. Available evidence, such as the previously mentioned difference in coverage between the Chris Lee and Tony Weiner stories, indicates that it’s the latter.
Businesses can reinvent themselves to keep going… look at Kodak, a fine old venerable company. As photography moved from film to digital, they kept up with it, modifying their product line accordingly. The Dinosaur Media hasn’t updated their product line, therefore their primary goal can’t be making money.
QED.
What kind of business tries to appeal to just “one particular market”. The answer is: a niche business, a boutique business, not a national media business.
Your problem is, you do not recognize propaganda when you see it. Go to this site: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=75171#axzz1OdfgJH9T
Read the questions in order. Write them down. Watch how they use the questions to build up a negative emotional response. They get you ginned up, then culminate with the ultimate bogeyman, the nuclear bomb. At that time, no one had ever talked of using a tactical nuclear bomb to go after Iranian nuclear capability. It was a false-choice argument. The result of these first 5-6 questions was to portray Repubs as bloody-handed, nuke-wielding madmen. It did not matter how they answered. They were all guilty. “When did you stop beating your wife?”, indicts you by just asking the question. The most interesting thing about it is, that most of the Repubs on the stage were all out of power and had nothing to do with the war, and Ron Paul had opposed it vociferously.
That was hosted by CNN. At the time, they had a daily ticker of casualties in Iraq. They do not have that for the mounting casualties in Afghanistan today. Bias much? Of course. You are a fool, if you cannot see the bias. The propaganda works on you.
Dear Mr. Malone,
Every business is a niche business. If that were not so we’d all be driving Edsels and listening to The Andrew Sisters on 8-track. What you are referring to is monopolistic behavior and that can get you in big trouble. Every new enterprise is looking to fill a gap in demand or, riskier, create a new product that fills a new unrecognized demand.
As for the example presented, I’ll not comment on the merits. I’ll just say that if CNN could attract eyeballs with your opinion that make them more money they would.
The people who control the media don’t control it in the way most think If they adopt positions and attitudes (politics) that decrease revenue they don’t last. It may seem to you to take a long time. That’s good. At almost 70 I’m a bit more patient.
Regards,
Roy
I think it wouldn’t be unfair to say that the political Left in America has exchanged sides in the dance that once saw the Left bitterly opposed to Richard Nixon and in my opinion, rightly so.
However, since that time, the Left has become the thing they once abhorred. As far as I am concerned, they occupy virtually the same intellectual space as did Nixon and a hell of a lot of big time red necks back in the day.
Open minds have closed and attitudes hardened and those who once stood on a platform of challenge cannot themselves now stand to be challenged. Those who once stood for openness and justice and fair play are themselves nothing more than a pack of stupid rednecks who indulge in double standards the exact same way I used to have to listen to adults tell me smoking a joint made me a degenerate while they themselves were refreshing a cocktail which they couldn’t see was just another drug, and, unlike weed, highly addictive.
Young people hate double standards because they tend to see things with fresher eyes. It’s just a matter of time before they reject political correctness, anti-racist racists, ignoring law and those new rednecks on the block, the political Left.
“I think it wouldn’t be unfair to say that the political Left in America has exchanged sides in the dance that once saw the Left bitterly opposed to Richard Nixon and in my opinion, rightly so.”
The Left hasn’t changed sides. It was always and is now anti-American; the Left is just more brazen about it now.
Nixon was hung out to dry by the WaPo and the NYT as payback for nailing Alger Hiss, whom both papers supported vociferously. Whitaker Chambers in his book “Witness” credited Nixon, in the eleventh hour, with preventing Hiss from wriggling off the hook. Both papers had smeared Chambers mercilessly, while defending Hiss just as passionately, and they hadn’t forgotten an old score.
And if you think that that isn’t true, or is far-fetched, recall that Walter Duranty of the NYT got a Pulitzer Prize – for singing Stalin’s praises while he murdered the kulaks, something that Duranty hushed up.
We have a problem in this country, and the WaPo and (especially) the NYT are at the heart of it.
Absolutely. And the NYT once thought Hitler was kinda nifty, too. They’ve always loved Castro and now spend a lot of ink extolling the virtues of China (a bigger den of crony capitalism than Chicago!) The NYT apparently never met a totalitarian they didn’t like.
Used to be they claimed their mission was to “Comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.” Nowadays it’s “comfort the Democrats and afflict the Republicans”. This, they call “objective”.
Then and nowadays, the Establishment Media has been nothing but about picking sides – the very opposite of ‘objective.’
(I’ve been distrusting the media’s mouthpieces since way before it was cool.)
“It’s just a matter of time before they reject political correctness….”
Well, I’ve been hoping for that for a very long time, but it sure ain’t happened yet. I worked in academia since the 1980′s, when PC started to put a stranglehold on things, up until very recently. I kept thinking that parents and “young people” would wake up, but PC has gotten even worse, and seems as entrenched as it ever was. And parents keep sending their kids off to the Indoctrination Factories that we call the public schools and higher ed. We’ve seen rays of hope lately with people like Breitbart creating cracks in the media monolith, and groups like the Tea Party rising, but as we saw in Wisconsin there are very violent, powerful forces on the Left in opposition. And there are a lot of financial resources, still, which the Left can use.
I agree with you that “those who once stood on a platform of challenge cannot themselves now stand to be challenged.” But part of the problem was that a very large number of those who stood on that “platform” had very faulty, harmful ideas in the first place–the ideas of the New Left. Many of the ones shouting with the megaphones on the platform did not believe in real individual liberty, or the responsibility that must go with liberty.
Ooops–this was meant as a reply to “14. Dial C For Cocktail Waitress”
@Egil #16 – Hi. Do you think there are many Conservatives in Academia? Or is it that they cannot “reveal” themselves “for obvious reasons”? Perhaps a ‘turnover’ in the School System(s)to a ‘Less Indoctrinated system’ should become a new course for conservatism? Or is that just a fantasy on my part? Or at least ‘even’ the playing field more by demanding certain things from our educators, (such as less anti-American teachings?) America has her flaws but to have our children ‘hating’ their country on the basis of what the ‘feelings’ are from a (liberal or far left) educator is preposterous… After all it ‘is’ our Tax dollars [Federal and Local] that’s funding the ‘poor’ education (on many levels) many American kids are getting… There is ‘much resistance’ to changing the face of American academia… I am not in academia and just thought I’d ask someone who is… Do you think there is hope?
At any rate I am just happy Conservatism has an advocate in Breitbart. Glad to have him on our side… God Bless Him! – He can surely give it right back to the media – a quick thinker in front of the cameras and the journ-o-lists… Take care.
Hi FAITH11. Thanks for your reply. In my experience, I’ve known a few conservatives in academia over the years who would very quietly admit their beliefs to me, but they did all they could to hide those beliefs from the department chairs–understandably so because of the way people get to keep their jobs or earn tenure. There were a few others like me who wouldn’t hide our beliefs as much, but we were in a tiny minority at our institutions. Lots of national surveys have shown that, especially in the Humanities and Social Sciences, faculties are overwhelmingly of the Left nation-wide, and that was my experience in the places I worked at. And sadly even in the hard sciences the trend has been more leftwards–you tend to get more grant money if your research project has to do with some favorite left-wing project like “global warming,” etc. And there is a lot of informal filtering out of conservatives in the hiring processes. Even though one college where I worked at for 10 years was not as extreme as others, I ran into some of that.
Where I tended to meet a slightly higher percentage of fellow conservatives was in the “support positions”–people who worked in the college mail rooms, print shops, clerical positions, etc. But these people don’t have much clout. As in the mainline churches, the people who tend to rise to the higher academic positions are those who play the Politically Correct game. And since the 1960′s when the inmates started taking over the asylum, many college administrators have been extremely cowardly in defending freedom of speech, and in trying to get a diversity of opinion.
You’re right that we badly need to focus on breaking the strong far-Left bias among public school teachers and administrators. I think our country will continue to deteriorate until that is successfully addressed. Things were already trending towards left-wing bias when I was a schoolkid in the 70′s, and it has gotten worse. Many college education departments are dominated by wacky leftist ideologues who not only want to promote political agendas, but they are clueless about how to teach effectively. But also, many more parents need to take this problem seriously before anything will get accomplished. There are some good, dedicated teachers out there, but they get drowned out by what groups like the NEA are doing, and if parents don’t demand better, not much will change.
You’re right that we should appreciate how people like Breitbart are doing great work. And I recommend reading Roger Kimball about higher ed issues, if you aren’t familiar with him yet.
#16 Egil
“Well, I’ve been hoping for that for a very long time, but it sure ain’t happened yet. I worked in academia since the 1980′s, when PC started to put a stranglehold on things, up until very recently. I kept thinking that parents and “young people” would wake up, but PC has gotten even worse, and seems as entrenched as it ever was.”
Not while they’re in school, but if the after they graduate – and if they don’t join the “chattering classes” – just wait until reality sets in. Otherwise known as those first paychecks (if they can find a job). A quick glance at the stub, with all those deductions is usually enough to do it
You’re right, Mr. Giles. I shed a lot of my foolish, leftist beliefs when I got my first full-time job and started having to pay my bills.
One of my worries, though, is that so many more people who do get jobs now are getting them in the public sector and are getting sucked into that attitude that the Public Teat is the place to be. There is a very prevalent entitlement attitude among not only government workers, but also people with jobs in non-profit organizations.
And with the way our school systems are much more forcefully indoctrinating kids in anti-American beliefs, it seems that somewhat fewer adults grow out of that kind of mindset than before. I hope I’m wrong.
And as you say, having to face adult responsibilities can do wonders.
Egil,
Your story of awakening is being echoed much more noticeably these days. I feel fortunate that I learned that lesson early in life. I had a paper route in a Boston suburb in the 1950s. I delivered the Boston Globe and the Herald Traveler. The Globe was for the Democrats and the Traveler was for the Republicans. I wasn’t quite sure what that meant but the Traveler customers tipped twice as much as the skinflint Democrat bastards.
Roy
Ha! I sure do believe you about who the cheapskate tippers were!
And its interesting how multiple studies have shown that conservatives are much more charitable than leftists are. Interesting but not surprising.
It makes me feel old to be thinking that some young whippersnapper in his diapers is going to be writing a history of this someday.
At least Nixon served in the US Navy. Graduated from a real law school. Wrote his own books. Had a much higher IQ than BHO. What has BHO done except destroy
the American Dream and American Exceptionalism.
“And the MSM is finished.”
Whats that on the horizon?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/14/clinton-muses-creating-internet-agency-combat-falsehoods/
Bill Clinton Muses About Creating Internet Agency to Combat Falsehoods
http://www.npr.org/2010/12/17/132144972/U-N-Delegates-Debate-Control-Of-Internet
U.N. Delegates Debate Control Of Internet
The MSM have termporarily lost control due to technology, so their masters will try to control the content. They’re not quite done yet Tony.
Old media is dead. Long live new media.
I don’t bother to watch the news on TV anymore. I get more in depth coverage from the internet, on a wider range of subjects, than I ever have from a TV “news” show. The issues of our times are too complex for soundbite coverage. Moreover, until they begin to address the inherent left-wing bias from the major news outlets, they have low credibility with me.
I am amazed, in this day, that any thinking person considers the MSM as either valid journalism, or relevant. Congressman Weiner is interested in his position, but no one else, other than his family, cares much. Another story about a slime ball in Congress no longer is titillating. They work in an ethical sewer.
The more telling development was the total media silence about John Edwards during the last election campaign, except for one publication which thrives off titillation. The parallels are common; elicit sex, lies, phony family, apple pie, and pay offs, but the stakes were infinitely higher. Senator Edwards came very close to becoming our sitting President. When will the American people wake up, the MSM publishes propaganda.
It was never reported during the Clinton sex saga, that when one officer of the court, Ken Starr, discovered the Paula Jones filth in his duties, he reported it to the court, the boss of the independent prosecutor. Starr strongly recommended dropping the matter. It was not in his charter, Whitewater reality corruption. The court ordered him to continue. The MSM savaged him as smearing the office of the President for partisan purposes. When will the American people wake up, the MSM publishes propaganda.?
We continue to vote for liars. We continue to read propaganda, and consider it straight news. When people believe Dan Rather as he tries to throw an election, with falsehoods about George Bush’s past, and almost succeeds, is there any subsequent reflection by the people? Do they stop watching CBS?
I judge that this is the basic reason for Fox News, Breitbart, and other outlets. MSM lived off trust, and committed suicide though slanted news.
The so called Main Street Media is nothing of the sort. It has not been mainstream for a long time.
They are dying because people want to know what is going on, but must turn to alternative sources to find it. They don’t want to be lied to, scolded like children by pompous jerks, or lectured to by people who know less than they do.
On-air “reporters” get their talking points on their blackberries from the White House in real time, and dutifully report what they are told. They lie, under report, censor what is really going on, etc. Newspapers and television “news shows” all report the same “news” with the same pejoratives.
These “reporters” belong to organizations such as Center for Public Integrity and Pro Publica and not only neglect to mention their affiliation, they certainly won’t mention Soro’s funding of these organizations.
We must understand that they no longer report the news, nor represent the mainstream in any commonly understood fashion.
The so-called MSM is now properly defined as the:
*** MoP (Ministry of Propaganda) ***
They are no more than that. Goebbels would be proud.
One cannot solve a problem unless the problem is properly defined and stated. Once everyone understands that what you see and hear from the MSM is nothing but propaganda that should be promptly and summarily dismissed, America will be on the road to recovery.
I am personally surprised that anyone still watches MSM broadcasts and reads their drivel.
I also canceled my newspaper subscription last year. It was very hard – my parents had instilled in me the ethic of reading the paper and getting informed. When I realized how often I was being lied to, and also how often I read in the paper about something I had heard on the radio news or talk shows, discussed much more openly and with more information, I realized I had to do it. The final straw was a front page article (San Diego Union Tribune) where the author discussed the tea party and indicated that they just didn’t know why the tea party people were angry at Obama since he was doing such a good job. I’m sure they would have known if they had bothered to ask *even one* person at one of these group get-togethers. I canceled that week. (And the only thing I have missed is the comics page, though racist screeds like “La Cucaracha” had been ruining that for me also).
Somebody please make a bumper sticker with this simple two-word message:
“DIVEST MSM!”
ah good essay but you left out so much more:
JOURNO-LISTERS- a monopoly dedicated to making sure no one publishes an alternative opinion
and the LA TIMES HIDING the video of Obama fawning over his pro_fakestinian handlers
who needs a minister or CZAR of propaganda when you have a majority of the media as fanbase, an unquestioning uncurious uneducated public who eats the lies like candy
This is in response to all of the nonesense emenating from one T. T. Thomas
1. I never claimed to be perfect, in fact, I am far from it. Thankfully I am forgiven my shortcomings by the unbounded grace of God. That being said, I only represent my self. I don’t represent hundreds of thousands of constituents as Weiner does. When an elected official proves to be all too human, one might forgive the indescretion, but what I will not forgive is his attempt to cover it up and besmirch the character of those who caught him with his pants down, so to speak.
2. Your ramblings on the constitution actually betray your utter lack of knowledge of how it should be applied in our daily lives as Americans. You complain about people “cherry picking” it and the Bible to support their sacred cows while engaging in the very action your self. Nice to quote the qualifications to be a representative, fair and good! Note to T3 – No one is challenging Weiner on those qualifications you dolt! The part of the constitution you so cavalierly dicard is HOW one get’s elected! His constituents will determine if he is fit to represent them or not. They, not you, have the right to determine what information they require to make an informed decision. Since congressmen affect all Americans with their policies, positions and votes, we all have a stake in each and every one of them. If any citizen finds a congressmen engaged in questionable activity, it is our CIVIC DUTY to bring it to light and let the chips fall where they may.
3. Again, not one example of where Brietbart made a claim that later turned out to be false. Further, you seem to have disdain for those of us who get our information from the internet and not the traditional media outlets. Two questions, what are you doing reading stuff on PJ, since were all a bunch of idiots and two, where pray tell do you get your unbiased, accurate news from? ABC, MSM, MSNBC, The NYT? PLEASE!
4. Your ramblings about how the youth of this country have determined that the old moral code is outdated and no longer useful and therefore should be thrown out make you sound like you either agree with them or are just too old and tired to be bothered with an honorable fight. First, I agree with you that our culture has sunk to lows our grandparents are shocked by. THAT DOESN;T MEAN YOU GIVE UP THE FIGHT! No, it means you take the fight to their doorstep because we are right and they (you) are wrong.
5. I gave you 5 reasons why what Weiner did matters and you didn’t address any of them. No, you just prattled on about the siliness of those who get their information from the internet and the uselessness of having any moral standards because we are all failures of one degree or another on that front.
You actually make me ill to my stomach.
Good riddance
Brad…all that rambling to justify your moral hypocrisy?
The point remains, that a less than honorable political hack opportunist was [sent] some information and or materials and he is given credit for having been on the job as some great investigative journalist out to protect the nation and rid government of people like himself. Well bud, if you want to show me some of your own credibility, list all the moraless and corrupt government officials representing the GOP side that your hero Breitbart has gone after. You are aware that there is a good sized list of such on the GOP side…are you not? Guess that leaves your points of argument ruderless!
As to the constitution, it is rather black and white as to its application regarding the qualifications of a legislator, who are to vote into office such legislators and who holds the constitutional process and authority to sanction and or or expell a legislator. Unless you are selected to sit on the ehtics committee of the House or a voter in the district of Rep. Weiner, the constitution is rather plain and simple in its language to you. It leaves [exclusively] to congress (the ethics committee’s) and the voters of his district, the authority to define what morality they will or will not accept….not you nor a thousand activist pundits! Again, you have no regards for the constitution!
Likewise, you have a very limited understanding of the constitution in regards to who elected congressional members represent. They represent thir districts…not their State and not any other district in any other States of the nation. The nations collective constitutional business is governed in congress by a simple majority and or a super majority consensus. How in the world did you ever conclude from the constitution that every legislator was to represent you and your whims? Learn about the balance of powers in congress and why legislators only [serve a certain number of population] by establishing districts.
I have no problems with your wanting to “fight” but at least know what you’re fighting for and…… where to take your fight. If you don’t like the constitution and its mandated processess then take your fight to that issue. If you don’t like the nations morality, then take that fight to the churches and the Supreme Court. Otherwise, take your complaints to the legislators that represents you in accordance with the constitution.
TTThomas
What the hell are you talking about?
your a republican eh, funny that!
Yep, there have been a number of them from the GOP, difference is they either step down of their own accord, are forced out by GOP party leadership or are attacked by the media you hold in such high regard. Mercilessly, incessantly and without end, even when there is no there, there.
If you think that Weiner or any other congressman doesn’t impact your life regardless of where you live and what district they represent, you are seriously out of touch with reality. No, I can’t vote for or against Weiner as I live in the west. I can, however, go after him or any other congressman when they demonstrate they are lacking in character and judgement.
Ethics committees are no where to be found in the constitution in any way other than the congress is allowed to establish the rules under which they conduct business.
I really do fail to see your point, other than you appear to be a moraless hack from the left trolling PJ and other conservative sites to spew your idiocy.
Don’t bother responding, I don’t give a flying heck what you have to say at this point, as you don’t really have anything to say that is constructive and will move our country forward.
Maybe you should get a twitter account and begin corresponding with Mr Weiner.
The troll problem is becoming very serious. It is disrupting many, many sites where rational discussions occur. They distract knowledgeable commenters such as Brad from making his arguments to answer addled brain diatribes. I suspect that most of them are not as stupid and confused as they appear. This infestation is an organized Cloward-Priven/Alinsky tactic to annoy and distract the enemy.
I have been visiting Belmont Club for years. The group of regulars over there are one of the best on the web – by a long shot. During the Georgia/Russia thingy a bunch of new guys showed up pushing the Russian POV. They were obviously smart guys with a great command of English. They just didn’t handle the idioms very well. That’s a characteristic of a school learned language. Pretty quickly the regulars started addressing them as “comrade”. They moved on to greener pastures.
I have a thought for an approach. Moderation. Not only moderation for language and defamation but also for distraction trolls. Some site proprietors see comment count as an indication of popularity. Others simply don’t have the time to moderate. I think that as site that follows the follows the approach outlined can attract a stable of thoroughbreds. I have no idea how this affects the business model.
Oh Brad……since you can’t read or maybe can’t comprehend let me once again cite a portion of the constitution to you.
[Article I, Section 5....Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.]
Does that help you understsand your loss of understanding the constitution re: “Ethics committees are no where to be found in the constitution in any way other than the congress is allowed to establish the rules under which they conduct business.” The congress follows the constitutional principles of due process. Ever study that one in the constitution?
Now, once more, where in your copy of the constitution does it address that any elected official be held to a higher “standard” for which you speak to?
Further, you state: ["No, I can’t vote for or against Weiner as I live in the west. I can, however, go after him or any other congressman when they demonstrate they are lacking in character and judgement."] Who elected you, a self professed failure in CHARACTER AND JUDGEMENT, relying on the grace of God for forgiveness…to be judge and jury over somebody elses ‘perceived’ character and judgement? In the case of Rep Weiner, the constitution provides for such provision of judgement but….it leaves you on the sideline bench.
If your idol Breitbart was the honorable disciple of the Lone Ranger as you state, he would have gathered his information, first taken it to the approriate law enforcement authorities if potential crimes were indicated and certainly to the House Ethics Committee rather than first playing his schoolyard bully media games.
Sadly, you’re a part of the newer generations that have been conditioned to cherry-pick the constitution and its processes in whatever self-serving ways fits your whims of the moment. Your approach in ignorance will never get you far in effecting a national consensus for fixing the nation and changing what doesn’t work. Personalizing issues and perpetuating division is no winning strategy but hey, keep on following all your internet bloggers who subscribe to your strategy. Maybe on day you will have the good fortune to grow up and learn that the nation is broken from the bottom up…not the top down. Those at the top only represent what a majority of the people of the nation are. Did you forget our elected officials are also commoners…. family, friends and neighbors of the people who send them to Washington? Wake up, if you want to be a warrior, learn how to do it right, within the construct of the constitution or at least advocate amending the constitution to better comply with your demands.
TTThomas
What I said about the constitution and the actual words in the constitution amount to the same thing. Troll!
Your position that since we all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God and therefore none of us are adaquately “pure” enough to stand in judgement of any of our fellow man is childish and perverse.
If you had a brain, you would understand that the logical conclusion you are forced to draw from your position is that there is no law that man can rightly follow as all laws are man made and man is imperfect and worse has no moral agency under which to stand in judgement of another, therefore it is the law of the jungle, each to his own devices, survival of the fittest.
You, Damon and Weiner go have a nice little weeney roast.
Hi would you mind sharing which blog platform you’re using? I’m planning to start my own blog in the near future but I’m having a difficult time selecting between BlogEngine/Wordpress/B2evolution and Drupal. The reason I ask is because your layout seems different then most blogs and I’m looking for something completely unique. P.S My apologies for getting off-topic but I had to ask!