Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Charley Gibson & Brian Williams Trying to Defend Media From Scotty's Book

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
EV_Ares Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 09:28 AM
Original message
Charley Gibson & Brian Williams Trying to Defend Media From Scotty's Book
"On 'The Early Show,' ABC's Charles Gibson said he think 'the media did a pretty good job' before the Iraq invasion: 'We were not given access to get into the country to go along with the inspectors. But the questions were asked. It's convenient now to blame the media.'

NBC's Brian Williams said you have to take into account the 'post-9/11' mindset."

Link to entire article: http://www.politico.com/playbook /
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
1. I remember clearly..
They were cheerleaders. They questioned nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 09:32 AM
Response to Original message
2. hey williams, you remember judy miller?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
3. Pathetic...as if the post "9/11 mindset" meant we had to throw history out the window
and suspend reality.

Not that our self-satisfied media will squirm in the least about this...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PCIntern Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
4. Post 9/11 rimjob...
is more like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 09:43 AM
Response to Original message
5. Right guys - your coverup for Bush on ToraBora was a prime example - questioning Kerry's integritry
on that instead of the integrity of those from Bush WH and Pentagon who lied to you about it for over two years. You acted as if Kerry's charge was just 'political' posturing, because no way would Rove and Tommy Franks lie to you, eh?

Media covered up for Bush on Plame outing, too. They knew damn well that Rove was lying for the WH the entire time, but allowed him the room to run as a WH steeped in straightforward talk and truthfulness.

The media's duty was to their owners who needed Bush protected for the favorable legislation they expected from a second term of BushInc. They knew a President Kerry would NOT allow their expansion, as he already sent his disapproval to the senate floor in June 2003.

The media is FULL of Bushprotecting liars cashing HUGE PAYCHECKS as they protect BushInc and his fascist media alliance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aint_no_life_nowhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 09:45 AM
Response to Original message
6. Charlie Gibson has that same constipated look as Brit Hume
He must have taken constipation lessons from the constipation master, Brit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
navarth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
7. Lying Cowardly Bastards All
They'll be trying to re-write history. May they fail miserably. They're ALL COMPLICIT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
8. and just one thing, in all the 8 years of *
the media has never been liberal. that is total BS, the media went totally corporate and protected *'s a$$, especially the rallying call of an invasion on another country. when this filthy administration started shock and awe, they portrayed it as a wonderful thing. God, how disgusting and shameful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 09:50 AM
Response to Original message
9. The invasion began in 2003. How long is that "post 911 mindset" supposed to last, anyway?
I mean, I frankly do understand the irrational jingoism that took place for a week or even a month after the attacks. An adult-- let alone a professional-- could collect their senses in fairly short order. These people were actively helping to promote lies, and just ignoring the gaping holes in the administration's story.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 10:06 AM
Response to Original message
10. it is convenient to blame the 'post-9/11' mindset
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 10:07 AM
Response to Original message
11. Couric differed and said it was "one of most embarrassing chapters in American journalism
Edited on Wed May-28-08 10:08 AM by OmmmSweetOmmm
http://www.politico.com/playbook /

Katie Couric clearly disagreed with Gibson, calling the run-up to the war one of the most embarrassing chapters in American journalism: Our responsibility is sometimes to go against the mood of the country and ask hard question.

Couric was also on the Today Show this morning with Williams and Gibson and I posted about it here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gatorboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. She sure changed her tune.
Edited on Wed May-28-08 10:13 AM by gatorboy
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/28/couric-on-iraq /

This week, Couric spoke at the National Press Club with host Marvin Kalb to discuss Democracy and the Press. Couric explained that her goal in Iraq was to appear neutral and avoid a Walter Cronkite moment, as she put it:

Is it my job to go over and say this war is terrible and withdrawal is necessary? I dont necessarily think that is the case. I dont necessarily feel that unless there is a clear cut factual element to it. I have never really saw it as my role, unless something is really egregious and without question wrong.

Kalb rebutted Courics assertions, charging that she offered only neutered judgments about the status on the ground and missed an opportunity to critically assess the situation in Iraq:

You offered only one judgment about the war. And you cushioned that by the way. You said, There are definitely areas where the situation is improving. Fine. But you then asked nine questions, nine important questions about Iraq. But you didnt even make an effort to answer them. You have been there. Youre an anchor every night. Youve seen the material that flows into you. Surely on some of those nine issues, you must have had a strong feeling.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. It might be a guess on my part, but I think her tenure with CBS will be coming to a close
and she is finally deciding to open up.

People, even Democrats couldn't believe she was pimping the Shrub administration because she was reportedly a Democrat from a strong Democratic family. Her sister, who passed away young, was involved deeply in Democratic politics. I figure the "access" to the WH and paycheck lured Couric away from being a truthteller, and now, unfettered from the pressure of her bosses (if she is indeed losing her job), is now finding the "courage" and is speaking out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynnTheDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 10:21 AM
Response to Original message
14. Which "media" did a "pretty good job"? The WH-paid military stooges?
Yeah they did a "pretty good job", alright. Just like Brownie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oilwellian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. My first thought as well
The "leftwing media" sure has been quiet about that little scandal, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
15. Lauer interviewing Russert on Today
I thought, "Boy, now this is going to be a hard-hitting segment," and I wasn't disappointed. Matt and Tim moved into absolution mode from the get-go, and generously let each other and all their media brethren and cistern off the hook. The most revealing comment, though, was the set up for one of Lauer's questions, where he mentioned some of the damaging things McClellan said in his book, damaging things that we've been screaming at them for years. Lauer ran through a short list, then said, "This isn't MoveOn.org saying these things . . ."

After I reassembled my head, it occurred to me that this comment said everything that needed to be said about the media's predictable reaction to McClellan's book, and that is, that even though they've heard these things for years, they haven't seen fit to bring them to the public's attention, or question the Bush administration's patent lies, or evince any skepticism whatsoever. Why? Because it was the dirty fucking hippies that were bringing it to their attention in the media. And for whatever reason, whether it's because they didn't like the message or the messenger or they hadn't found it first, they declined to report on the sins of the Bush administration for years and years, and now they're evincing surprise at McClellan's book. The surprise, however, isn't about the meat of what he said, it's that he broke the cone of silence around the Bush administration. Again. The big question in the media's mind seems to be not "Is all of this true?" but rather, "Why is McClellan telling us all this?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
17. Plausible Deniability
Yep...the "gatekeepers" of the "librul" media are sure on the job aren't they? :sarcasm:

Williams has always been a GOOP tool...just recently he slobbered all over himself over how a "war hero" Gramps was and how he listens to Rushbo and other right wing screamers...where he surely gets his talking points from. He used to irk the hell out of me during the Clinton inquisition as you could hear his hatred drip in each report he gave...and then would go on Imus and yuk it up with the hyenas there over another lame Clinton or Kerry or Gore joke.

Gibson...don't even get me started on that right wing shill...for years I couldn't tell him and Britt Fumes apart.

All the networks were onboard for the invasion...and in spades. There were ratings to grab...and big ones. Their worst nightmare was a last minute settlement...they were gung-ho to show those great battle scenes and chant "USA, USA"...be damned with what the world thought. There were also the big no-bid contracts companies like GE and others got in the "rebuilding"...war is good for the bottom line.

The saving grace here is that these stenographers are being looked at due to the rise of the Internet and that they're losing their ability to both control and manipulate "the news". Instead of admitting they wanted this invasion...and for their own profit...they just shrug their shoulders and pretend they were duped like the rest of us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-28-08 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
18. The Professor Says "You Have To Take Into Account. . ."
". . .Brian Williams' mindset." What a tool.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Sep 20th 2014, 10:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC