In the discussion thread: Gawker Rant: "Fuck the White House Correspondents' Association Dinner" [View all]
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Fri Apr 27, 2012, 03:50 PM
calimary (40,167 posts)
5. It's sad and true. "Journalists" in Washington have sold their souls for access.
GOTTA get those invites to those chi-chi cocktail parties at those luxury Georgetown living rooms.
SIMPLY MUST fawn over all those newsmakers - don't care if they're crooks! GOTTA have that precious access!!! If we can't rub elbows with all these people - how will we ever get access to them?
Another in a continuing series of softball interviews?
I had this argument with a friend recently. If I had been news president at MSNBC or someplace, and my staff's coverage started getting so tough on these assholes that we were threatened with a cut-off of access, I would then make THAT the story! I would have had a drumbeat - NOT of "oh, poor me, locked out... boo hoo," but rather with a more aggressive, combative tone - "they've denied us access because they don't want to face objective questioning - in fact THEY'RE SCARED of it! 'Cause they know their version won't hold up if they're faced with anybody but our competitors - who always present themselves on their knees because they've just got to get into those fancy-ass VIP cocktail parties." We'd rather present the truth, with our own political stars and celebs - and there are PLENTY of them. But our competitors would shut THEM out, too. WE won't be doing that, or playing that cowards' game. You don't need to get into the back room or the private VIP cocktail party to report THE NEWS!!!"
Thinking back to the absolute 100% shut-out of objectors' voices during the run-up to the Iraq War, I can't help but think of the LEGIONS of experts, activists, and even the handful of war opponents in Congress and the Senate - who'd be GREAT to fill the airwaves and the face time with, were my news division to be shut out of interviews with contradicta or rummy or wolfie or dickie.
"TOO FREAKIN' BAD! You wanna see contradicta or wolfie or rummy or ari or scotty or dickie, go watch any other channel and you get the same stale Xerox'd version with the same big names over and over and over. YOU could play their part in any interview because you already have seen the same script blast-faxed all over everywhere. And you'll keep getting their lies and their spin and their tall tales that don't stand up to serious, legitimate, objective questioning. But WE would offer alternative views, alternative faces and voices, and thereby not only get the truth out to the public, BUT start grooming new names and faces as spokespeople and well-seasoned talking heads - on OUR side. It would have paid two different sets of dividends. WE are not a wholly-owned subsidiary as those other networks are."
Only now are we building the left-leaning media profile - with MSNBC, and to a much lesser extent, Current. That should have started a decade ago. Only now are we building bench strength and our own stable of credible talking heads. Once again, our side comes from behind. Hope we don't stay there too long. And they're STILL caving! If they weren't, Cenk would still be on MSNBC and nobody who works for that network in Washingon would even bother moaning and groaning about how the republi-CONS there are pissed off at our coverage and won't come on our show! It wouldn't matter!!! TOTALLY IRRELEVANT!!! There's such an easy way to turn it around - to our favor!
And nobody's thinking that way at the networks, cable or otherwise. Because they just can't tear themselves away from the hard-ons for that precious access. I don't get it! It's just so obvious!!!!
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
It's sad and true. "Journalists" in Washington have sold their souls for access.
Please login to view edit histories.