For Dan Rather and his ilk I shed no tears. I save those for my wife’s uncle, who recently was laid off from his job as a photographer for a Chattanooga newspaper, turning a one-and-a-half-income household into a half-an-income household.
“A truly free and independent press is the red beating heart of democracy and freedom,” Rather said in an interview yesterday afternoon.
——–
So when a prominent member of the press falsifies documents and openly campaigns for one political party, is it fair to say that the red beating heart of democracy is about to fail?
I’m sympathetic to Rather’s point, with regards to the importance of the press to a healthy democracy. Leaving aside all of the snarky comments that are begging to be made about Rather’s legacy and how the major media outlets have dug their own holes, how exactly is it the Executive branch’s responsibility to revise their business model. If Rather and his cohorts will go on the airwaves and publicly admit that they spend 90% of their time telling others what to do and what to think, but can’t figure out how to do their own jobs, I’ll consider it a worthwhile cost for yet another executive overreach (or are we talking about an executive reach around?).
McGehee, my sympathies to your uncle and his family. Genuine citizens such as those are the ones who suffer the greatest challenges today.
In response to Mauther’s implied question, the sea change came about in the early 1980s, when the major players in the MSM decided to make their news divisions into profit-generating operations. Until then, news divisions were understood to be “loss leaders” which lead viewers to a specific source, then encouraged them to linger. Hence the attraction of shows such as 60 Minutes, or Cronkite’s popularity. People left the TV on CBS just to catch “Uncle Walter,” and that inertia/loyalty helped build ratings.
As soon as the big media groups turned their news organizations into profit-generating operations, they immediately began functioning by profit-generating principles, including “if it bleeds, it ledes!” The bigger the scandal (or controversy), the better the ratings. This led to over-hyped “scandals” such as Abu Grahib and the instigation of pseudo-scandals by way of inflammatory quotes and mis-quotes.
I think that one may fairly say that there are many examples in today’s media which are more easily explained by the drive for ratings & profits, than by a consciously liberal agenda.
Thanks, Casey. I should say that if it weren’t for my uncle-in-law I’d be dancing a jig in public about the death of corporate news media, rather than merely in the privacy of my own home office.
“Without action, he predicted, America will lose its independent media. ‘If we do nothing more than stand back and hope that innovation alone will solve this crisis,’ he said, ‘then our best-trained journalists will lose their jobs.’”
“A truly free and independent press is the red beating heart of democracy and freedom,” Rather said in an interview yesterday afternoon.
With government money comes government control, especially from this president. Anyone who has been paying attention has seen this time and again with the banks that received TARP money, GM, Chrysler, etc. That Dan Rather would call for government money to support “a truly free and independent press” shows he’s either not paying attention to what Obama is doing or is oblivious to the contradiction he’s proposing.
Why is this link so hard to open? I couldn’t get it at Instapundit either.
Brad,
It’s been linked by Drudge, Instapundit, and Martini Guy all in one day.
I’m surprised there’s power still on in Aspen
Yeah, I figured it was due to killer traffic. I couldn’t even get the Aspen main site to open.
I wish Stephen would have given comment, since apparently that’s the only way I’ll ever see it!
Link seems to be working now
Why is this sad? All Danny wants is getting paid for all his hard work for the Democrats over the years…
For Dan Rather and his ilk I shed no tears. I save those for my wife’s uncle, who recently was laid off from his job as a photographer for a Chattanooga newspaper, turning a one-and-a-half-income household into a half-an-income household.
“A truly free and independent press is the red beating heart of democracy and freedom,” Rather said in an interview yesterday afternoon.
——–
So when a prominent member of the press falsifies documents and openly campaigns for one political party, is it fair to say that the red beating heart of democracy is about to fail?
I’m sympathetic to Rather’s point, with regards to the importance of the press to a healthy democracy. Leaving aside all of the snarky comments that are begging to be made about Rather’s legacy and how the major media outlets have dug their own holes, how exactly is it the Executive branch’s responsibility to revise their business model. If Rather and his cohorts will go on the airwaves and publicly admit that they spend 90% of their time telling others what to do and what to think, but can’t figure out how to do their own jobs, I’ll consider it a worthwhile cost for yet another executive overreach (or are we talking about an executive reach around?).
Dan Rather, Walter Cronkite and CBS. Good riddance.
Anti American, Socialist Suckbutts.
McGehee, my sympathies to your uncle and his family. Genuine citizens such as those are the ones who suffer the greatest challenges today.
In response to Mauther’s implied question, the sea change came about in the early 1980s, when the major players in the MSM decided to make their news divisions into profit-generating operations. Until then, news divisions were understood to be “loss leaders” which lead viewers to a specific source, then encouraged them to linger. Hence the attraction of shows such as 60 Minutes, or Cronkite’s popularity. People left the TV on CBS just to catch “Uncle Walter,” and that inertia/loyalty helped build ratings.
As soon as the big media groups turned their news organizations into profit-generating operations, they immediately began functioning by profit-generating principles, including “if it bleeds, it ledes!” The bigger the scandal (or controversy), the better the ratings. This led to over-hyped “scandals” such as Abu Grahib and the instigation of pseudo-scandals by way of inflammatory quotes and mis-quotes.
I think that one may fairly say that there are many examples in today’s media which are more easily explained by the drive for ratings & profits, than by a consciously liberal agenda.
Thanks, Casey. I should say that if it weren’t for my uncle-in-law I’d be dancing a jig in public about the death of corporate news media, rather than merely in the privacy of my own home office.
“Without action, he predicted, America will lose its independent media. ‘If we do nothing more than stand back and hope that innovation alone will solve this crisis,’ he said, ‘then our best-trained journalists will lose their jobs.’”
Sad. And clueless.
Well, it may depend on what he means by “best-trained.” It may not be what we would understand that phrase to mean.
“A truly free and independent press is the red beating heart of democracy and freedom,” Rather said in an interview yesterday afternoon.
With government money comes government control, especially from this president. Anyone who has been paying attention has seen this time and again with the banks that received TARP money, GM, Chrysler, etc. That Dan Rather would call for government money to support “a truly free and independent press” shows he’s either not paying attention to what Obama is doing or is oblivious to the contradiction he’s proposing.