Comments on: Ignore It And It Will Go Away. Really!

By: Raoul Ortega

Raoul Ortega — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:10:13 +0000

And let’s not forget that much of what they reported didn’t require much more work than transcribing what “Deep Throat” told them to write. A person who it turns out had an agenda they were more than willing to support.

By: Lars Walker

Lars Walker — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:58:02 +0000

Very good, Widow.

By: The College Widow

The College Widow — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:53:47 +0000

Great comments on this thread, as usual. I’ve worked in several small market, big corporation owned newspapers – not in the newsroom but in production. From my perch in the shadows I’ve observed the following: most newsrooms seem to have the same gloomy atmosphere and are staffed by miserable people.

The younger the journo the more grumpy they were and seemed to think the weight of the world was on their shoulders. No body appreciated them and didn’t see their genius on their climb to the ivory towers of journalism. These were the kids taught by the Woodword and Bernstein generation. Eager to speak truth to power, the small market papers were just a line on their resume. Instead of learning their craft, they followed the templates set by corporate regional managers: be sure to slant stories toward the impact on minorities and be sure to get your photographer to shoot people of color to go with your story. Even if your story has nothing to do with minorities find a way to include that angle: reporting on minority issues gets the young journalist promoted to bigger markets.

The older journalists, staff writers and copy editors were generally more cheerful than the younger ones. These were the ones who had learned in smoke filled rooms using typewriters and ribbons. These were the ‘shoe leather’ reporters who knew how to write and meet a deadline without confusing a byline with saving the world.

As this generation goes into retirement, or takes buyouts as their positions go dark, so goes the last of the good reporters.

By: Jeff Brokaw

Jeff Brokaw — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:04:17 +0000

Lars – exactly right. Watergate plus Vietnam basically ruined journalism.

Not my theory though – I read that somewhere, I think it was “Breaking the News” by James Fallows (a pretty good book).

The list of ways the media killed itself is pretty long.

By: Mr. Sideous

Mr. Sideous — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:44:05 +0000

V,
I think the MSM’s attitude could be summoned up in their attitude at the end of the 2008 election, when charges of bias were starting to be leveled openly and consistently against their coverage:
“You are obviously in the tank for Obama.”
MSM: “I don’t know what you mean. We only cover winners.”

In so deep they don’t know what they don’t know.
or Clintonesque in disingeniousness.

By: Stephanie

Stephanie — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:31:50 +0000

I wonder when people will remember truth and facts are completly different?
Everyone knows what the truth is because they know the facts. The idiot reporters should have known better.

By: Lars Walker

Lars Walker — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:49:20 +0000

My impression is that Woodward and Bernstein “spoiled” it for everybody. Not that Woodward and Bernstein did wrong. Watergate was a legitimate, and important, story. But it imposed a template on all future reporting–reporting is about Speaking Truth to Power.

Unfortunately, in the minds of journalists, Truth meant liberal dogma, and Power referred only to Republicans.

Speaking Truth to the Left would be… gauche. And there’d be no movie deal.

By: Jeff Brokaw

Jeff Brokaw — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:40:16 +0000

I agree with Eric. No backlash. Circling the wagons, definitely.

The entire industry has lived in a bubble far too long. And let’s not forget that industry is unionized, which encourages job protection over all else, including survival of the industry those jobs depend on.

So, fine, do what you gotta do, newsers. It’s a sad day for us who value what newspapers used to be, and what they can be when done right. I sympathize with Rufus’ lament above, however, our local suburban paper (Chicago Daily Herald) isn’t too bad, if you ignore the AP stuff.

By: G-MAN

G-MAN — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:37:42 +0000

I haven’t gotten a newspaper in years, and I also stopped watching the national news during the Bush/Kerry election because I got so pissed over the slanted reporting. I’ve only recently started watching CBS again only because it’s sandwiched between the local news broadcasts. I’ve noticed a change recently even with Katie Couric. Every once in a while, they’ll do a broadcast that’s against the mainstream, like they’re testing the waters. Last night the story was Obama over in China while at home his ratings are significantly down in the areas of Afghanistan, the economy, health care, and I forget what else. They do have a long way to go to get to balanced reporting, but at least my blood pressure doesn’t spike as high whenever I watch it.

By: Eric

Eric — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:18:43 +0000

Veruckt, I think they’re all assuming “circle the wagons” position against the public’s anti-MSM backlash. Perfect head in the sand battle-stances, too.