Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

RIP, MSM

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
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 08:48 PM
Original message
RIP, MSM
Edited on Mon Jun-16-08 08:56 PM by NanceGreggs
I never met Tim Russert. He may have been a model father, a devoted husband, a caring son and Im willing to take his familys word for all of the above.

However, I draw the line at being told a great journalist has passed and I dont care who is offended by that remark. Thats because I have been, and continue to be, offended by the notion that what passes for journalism these days hasnt even a passing acquaintance with what real journalism is all about.

There have been many posts over the past few days berating those who have complained about the canonization of Russert, along with the non-stop coverage of his passing, with the admonition that our current crop of media journalists have a right to wallow publicly in their grief, because they have lost one of their own.

And therein lies the problem.

Where is the media coverage of our own who have passed? Where is the tribute to our troops who have fallen? Where is the in-depth coverage of our fellow citizens who have died due to homelessness, poverty, or lack of medical insurance? Where are the news stories about our fellow human beings in Iraq who have suffered untimely deaths infants, toddlers, children due to our actions? Where is the twelve-part series on our first responders who have died as a result of doing their jobs, without question or hesitation, in the aftermath of 9-11? Where are the tearful reminiscences about those who perished during Katrina while our government stood by and did nothing?

They were all a part of us; they were our fighting men and women, our sons and daughters, our neighbors and friends, our fellow countrymen, our fellow world citizens. When do we get to grieve? When do we get to take over the airwaves and say, We have lost one of our own, and due respect should and must be paid?

The MSM coverage of Tim Russerts passing, and the idea that we should all indulge the incessant ramblings of his colleagues because they are hurting, is offensive to me on every level imaginable.

I cant help but wonder how many of our own would not have perished if the so-called newsmen who now wail like inconsolable children had, even once, questioned this administrations justification for war, this governments total disregard for the humane treatment of others, this group of war-profiteers who lined their pockets while American troops went into battle without sufficient weapons and body-armour while citizens went hungry, while Iraqi children were mutilated, while torture became acceptable, while the Constitution and the rule of law were cast aside as unworthy of nightly coverage on what is jokingly referred to as the news.

With apologies to no one, I have no patience for the ill-informed, well-coiffed talking-heads rambling on about their collective grief due to the death of one of their own. Being one of their own is nothing to take pride in these days and perhaps that is the crux of the matter; a subliminal need to mourn not the passing of a journalist, but the demise of true TV journalism itself.

Rest in peace, Tim Russert. And rest in peace, MSM journalism - which, unfortunately, pre-deceased you years ago. I only wish you and your colleagues had bothered to notice its failing health, and stepped in to save it before its untimely death.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Lex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 08:49 PM
Response to Original message
1. You hit it out of the park
once again. :thumbsup:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laststeamtrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 08:52 PM
Response to Original message
2. Thank you. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 08:53 PM
Response to Original message
3. Thanks Nance.
NGU.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 08:53 PM
Response to Original message
4. Well said. Let's save it all for Cronkite. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
speedoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 06:26 AM
Response to Reply #4
212. Damn good point. Cronkite's the last of the true TV journalists. And Nance...
you nailed it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
5. But, but, but, they have the right
to abandon their posts, they're grieving

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
a la izquierda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
6. See, people??
This is how to be critical, without being an angry, maniacal jerk.

Nice post. Russert seemed like a great son, dad and husband and for that his family is blessed. I'm thrilled that nearly everyone is done covering his passing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
medeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. funeral tomorrow....not done
you wait...it will be live coverage am certain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
a la izquierda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. well, true enough.
forgot about that...oops.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vanlassie Donating Member (826 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #11
279. Yep...I heard Andrea Mitchell say there would be a "private"
service to be TELEVISED tommorrow.

Someone explain to me how "Private" and "Televised" go together, please?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #279
348. In the CELEBRITY world . . . it seems to --- !!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 08:55 PM
Response to Original message
7. Thank you!
I also find it offensive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 08:55 PM
Response to Original message
8. Yes. Your post honors Russert the man, the son, the father, the human, etc.
But does not permit exaggeration of his abilities.

As a television news journalist, I'd take him over some people and not over others, and none of the MSM contenders over someone like Amy Goodman or Bill Moyers, Judith Swallow, or Jim Lehrer, for example.

The grief-fest over Russert really was too long and too loud, IMO.

Recommended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peace13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:53 AM
Response to Reply #8
240. You speak in past tense but we have but reached the intermission
with the second act to follow. I too am sorry about Tim but they have done him no favors with this debacle. Peace, Kim
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlCzervik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
9. Well Done Nance.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
10. He was one of the loudest voices in the run up to the Iraq invasion
beating the war drums like there was no tomorrow. The first thing that come out of my mouth when I first heard that ole timmeh had passed was f__k tim russert. I seen through his game early on years ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. He not only beat the drums, he helped manufacture them.
Whenever cheney*/bush* needed to sell a lie to the American people, they usually went to Russert first.

Thanks, Nance.
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 03:47 AM
Response to Reply #15
190. And that, I cannot get around, either. GREAT post, Nance.
"With apologies to no one." I appreciate this very much.

:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gkhouston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #10
24. And every hour that they spend on the air talking about what a "tough"
journalist he was, I wonder, "How many people have been killed or wounded in Iraq this hour? What about their families and friends? Is their grief not newsworthy? How much suffering could have been prevented if Russert had been the journalist everyone is making him out to be?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 08:59 PM
Response to Original message
12. Thank you
K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:02 PM
Response to Original message
14. Thank you for saying everything I've been feeling
over the last few days' orgiastic grieving by the gentlemen of the press. It was as over the top and ridiculous as the week long wailing over Reagan's corpse.

Russert died young and before he might have had a chance to redeem himself. However, he didn't redeem himself in the time he did have.

Had he not enabled the criminals in power, perhaps fewer of us would be grieving for the people we have lost.

My sympathies to his family. My sympathy does not go to his fellow presstitutes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NC_Nurse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
16. While I agree with your opinion of what passes for journalism these days...
I would argue that the reason that there are not in depth reports about a LOT of deaths, distress and
the doings of our corrupt admin is because the majority of the American public could give a shit. I hate to say it,
but there IS investigative journalism being done and in-depth reporting being done in some publications and on
some news programs. The majority of Americans DON"T WATCH or READ these sources. They prefer to be told what
to think by "the ill-informed, well-coiffed talking-heads" you speak of rather than seek out and learn the actual facts
and information themselves and form their own opinions. People here have traded in actual "news" for the glitzy infomercial
of well-packaged horseshit.

That's what people watch. That's why it's on. Sad, but true.

Of course, I'm not talking about the kind of people that are on this board and the other political and news sites on the web. We are
the minority.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #16
22. I have to respectfully disagree ...
To say that the MSM "news" is presented as infotainment these days is, of course, an obvious truth. But to say that it is being presented that way because that's what the American audience asked for or wants has no basis in fact.

The truth is that TV "journalism" is being packaged as glitz-'n'-froth, steeped in editorial comment reflective of corporate sponsors and media outlet owners. That does not automatically mean that the viewing audience asked for such packaging, or would reject "real news" if they had a choice.

But they have no choice. And that is where journalistic responsibility comes into play - or used to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #22
121. Glenn Greenwald cites many polls showing Americans don't like infotainment and want news
These "reporters" print something or broadcast something totally mundane and then refer to it as evidence of what Americans want while posting more of the same. MSM should not be owned by companies like GE because they are used to promote their products or ideology. Break up these media monopolies and bring back the fairness doctrine while preventing campaign profiteering so people can get elected without having to bribe the media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JNelson6563 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 06:13 AM
Response to Reply #22
210. Always packaged in bite sized pieces
I don't watch TeeVee "news" any more and haven't really for some years. Still, even several years ago I'd be watching and they'd have someone on for some big,important story and they cut everyone off after 2 or 3 mintutes. "We're out of time..." and then they'd shift to the latest missing blonde or some other distraction. I always felt frustrated about that. They don't want to focus on anything big, important or substantial for any length of time. Except themselves.

Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OutaTowner Donating Member (21 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #22
242. The Nielsen Ratings..
Are what they're basing everything they do off of, which in turn spurs the evolution (or de-evolution) of the shows and programs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NC_Nurse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #22
300. People may SAY that in-depth news is what they want, but their viewing
habits suggest otherwise. Ratings are how this is based.

What audience share does Bill Moyers show have? Frontline? Amy Goodman's newscast?
PBS Newshour?

The highest ratings in news belong to....wait for it....FOX F*CKIN' NEWS.

Americans answer a poll based on what they think sounds good or intelligent...then they do what's easy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #22
351. True . . . and much of it is based on pandering to baser emotions ---
Just look at what the public is being offered on TV ---

Tatto -- Gambling --- Game shows ---

and Tits n' Ass whenever they can fit them in ---


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SusanaMontana41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #16
25. I agree
McClatchey reporters have done good investigative work and continue to do so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NC_Nurse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #25
341. McClatchey has just laid off hundreds in NC : (
Both at the Charlotte and Raleigh newspapers. That's how much support good newspapers are getting these days.
Part of it is the decline in ads due to the slowing economy...still, one has to wonder where the outcry in these towns is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SusanaMontana41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #341
398. I did not know that.
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 09:23 PM by SusanaMontana41
My paper has begun to lay off people in the ad dept. Our newsroom staff hasn't been touched, but vacated jobs have gone unfilled. And the company that owns the paper I work for is about as far from McClatchey-quality journalism as you can get.

McClatchey's investigative teams are among the best in the business. I am so sorry to hear the news, but thanks for the information.

Rats.

*edited to correct typo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #16
349. You don't do truthful journalism because the public already gets it ---
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 03:01 PM by defendandprotect
You do truthful journalism to INFORM the public whether they "give a shit" or not ---
That's the job the free press is assigned --- INFORM the public ---

No one said, "What if they don't want to hear it--?"

The "free press" --- if we ever see one again --- has to simply do its job ---

Tell the truth --

Stay around and try to help educate everyone here ---

some will care --- some won't "giva a shit" ---

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NC_Nurse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #349
356. Well, right. But don't expect the media conglomerates to change unless
there's money in it. That's all I'm saying. The more people become interested and watch
REAL journalism, the more there will be. I'm hoping the audience will grow along with the
increase in registered voters and viewership of the debates. It seems like more people are
moving in that direction. We shall see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #356
360. This is a case of monopoly ---
and the restraints which prevented something like this are within the "New Deal" ---
which has been getting cancelled by the right-wing ---
No one is using our anti-trust laws --
FCC was completely corrupted by right-wing takeover of government and its agencies ---

Lifting regulations on industry/corporations has permitted them to MONOPOLIZE broadcasting --
that situation didn't exist within the New Deal ---
"Fairness in Broadcasting Act" stood for more than 60 years!!!

So it's not a decision to be rectified by corporations; it's a decision which we have to
aright. Which our Congress has to set right!

I'd also comment that the reason you had a "Savings & Loan Thefts and Embezzlement Scandal"
was also due to the knocking over of "New Deal" regulations on corporations --

The reason we have this OIL situation right now is that Phil Gramm got in and knocked out
some regulations on corporations ---

Mortgage problems are also traceable to removing "New Deal" regulations
on banking and financial companies ---

Regulations governing pensions have been removed ---


356. Well, right. But don't expect the media conglomerates to change unless
there's money in it. That's all I'm saying. The more people become interested and watch
REAL journalism, the more there will be. I'm hoping the audience will grow along with the
increase in registered voters and viewership of the debates. It seems like more people are
moving in that direction. We shall see.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NC_Nurse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #360
392. I agree. Unfortunately, not many folks paid attention when the FCC screwed
up the rules for media conglomeration either.

I don't want to argue over it anymore. I guess I'm just pissed at the majority of the public who don't seem to give
a rat's ass about how they are getting FUCKED every day by this Repub circus we've had going for most of the last 28
years. I get tons of emails from all of the grassroots orgs trying to reverse and prevent further media consolidation/keep
a free internet/boycott shows and advertisers who produce false or biased programming.....etc. I have been supporting all of them
for YEARS. The only people who I seem to know or care about it are in those orgs or on this board. It's depressing.

My dad worked for the Bell system when it was broken up. We laugh now about what a crock of shit that was given the amount of consolidation EVERY major
industry has gone through in the last ten years. Now all the small Bell companies have re-merged into a few big companies. What a complete joke.

I think I need to go to bed. :-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #392
395. Bell System was efficient --- and probably one successful monopoly . . .
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 08:53 PM by defendandprotect
Remember that was a point in later debates when things for a long time were so screwed up --

I wish we still had telephone service like that --- !!!

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound like I was "arguing" with you --
and understand how you're feeling --- we're all feeling the same pretty much, I'd say.

Sleep well --- and remember Global Warming will probably wipe out all of this, anyway!!!

:evilgrin:



agree. Unfortunately, not many folks paid attention when the FCC screwed
up the rules for media conglomeration either.

I don't want to argue over it anymore. I guess I'm just pissed at the majority of the public who don't seem to give
a rat's ass about how they are getting FUCKED every day by this Repub circus we've had going for most of the last 28
years. I get tons of emails from all of the grassroots orgs trying to reverse and prevent further media consolidation/keep
a free internet/boycott shows and advertisers who produce false or biased programming.....etc. I have been supporting all of them
for YEARS. The only people who I seem to know or care about it are in those orgs or on this board. It's depressing.

My dad worked for the Bell system when it was broken up. We laugh now about what a crock of shit that was given the amount of consolidation EVERY major
industry has gone through in the last ten years. Now all the small Bell companies have re-merged into a few big companies. What a complete joke.

I think I need to go to bed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:05 PM
Response to Original message
17. Very excellent wording of what outrages so many of us.
I mean, when we did lose a major journalist, Molly Ivins, where was the M$M then??

I don't recall even hearing of her passing, except here on the Internet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SusanaMontana41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #17
27. I ran a big story on Molly in the newspaper I work for
Same for Ann Richards.

But my newspaper isn't exactly a major daily.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. Thank you for doing that.
We just started reading our local newspaper here in the rural area where we've moved - and it has far better coverage than the San Francisco Chronicle. Even though it only serve 80,000 of us.

I like the selection of people they choose for OpEd pieces better than the Chron's choices.

And they seem far less M$M if you know what I mean.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SusanaMontana41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #30
35. Thanks for that!
The editor writes lies for the opinion page, so I do what I can to correct his distortions on the news pages.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:07 PM
Response to Original message
18. A superb post
Thanks NanceGreggs
They can't fool all of the people all of the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blue sky at night Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
19. thanks once again......
Nance, you put your finger on my pulse on just about every issue that comes down the PIPE. To me it's just another guy who had a heart attack. Sorry, KO and all you media smucks....he was a dime a dozen kind of guy to me, and I didn't waste two minutes watching Meet The Press, ever. In My Opinion no member of the media that proudly sports a bu$h pin deserves a second thought out of me.

I have an idea for all you soggy-eyed mourners, turn OFF the FUCKING TV and go do something!

Here is an example: take a 30 minute walk with a grocery bag and pick up every piece of litter you see, the world will be a better place and you will feel better, and besides, it is good for your heart!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Berry Cool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #19
37. "Sorry KO and all you media schmucks..."
"Schmucks"? Was that necessary?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blue sky at night Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #37
53. hey sorry if I misspelled it, guess the spell checker.....
no really if you want to defend them, go ahead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XtraProudDem Donating Member (145 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:58 AM
Response to Reply #19
244. The "Bush pin..."
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 08:59 AM by XtraProudDem
HIDING a Bush pin UNDER your lapel, if that ever even HAPPENED, is not "proudly sporting" to me.

My problem with this whole issue is the fixating on a few quotes and private actions that may or may not have happened.

Yes, I get that Russert dropped the ball many times, and yes, I yelled at the TV (when he was on) sometimes too.

But there's no reason to be "offended" because his work buddies are sad - a few of them practically saw him die.

Besides, Hardball and Countdown were on MSNBC last night, and so were the prison shows.

I'm disappointed in Nance's commentary, and I'm a big fan of her writing. There's no good reason to be offended by the tributes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nightjock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #244
338. Al Gore told that story
I believe he's trustworthy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XtraProudDem Donating Member (145 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #338
344. I haven't heard anything
about that story coming from Al Gore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blue sky at night Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #244
394. guess I am sick of the overkill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
20. Hearing about some of the relationships and seeming influence he had...
Edited on Mon Jun-16-08 09:17 PM by HughMoran
....all I could think about was conspiracy and collusion of the media.

When I heard reporters talking about "defending" or "supporting" GE, their CORPORATION, all of my fears about the CORPORATE MEDIA were confirmed.

The BIG story that has been overlooked (for the most part) thus far is how cliquey the media is and how loyal they are to each other and their corporate bosses. I am disgusted and more cynical than ever after this episode. I'm sorry Russert is dead, but this has also blown the top off the "corporate media" - is anyone paying attention?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EV_Ares Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:17 PM
Response to Original message
21. U hit the nail on the head, knocked it out of the park, all of it. Thanks
for that post, you certainly speak my thoughts better than I could have or tried to say them. You speak for those who have lost a loved one in one of the situations you spoke of.

Great Post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xiamiam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #21
43. spot on..the exact points you mention are my issues as well..and i tried to say them but
you do have a flair...i have much compassion as well for all of us who were muffled.i understand the rage...it wasnt so very long ago..that nothing other than bush speak was all over the airwaves..until katrina when the incompetence was so in our faces that it became ok for the media to jump out of step for a second..and its been a slow journey...

I also think that the hoopla on the tv was obscene...similar to the anna nicole and paris hilton jail time fiascos..all while thousands were evacuated from their homes in iowa during record flooding with no end in sight....reinforced depravity and adulation bordering on worship...but the underbelly, regardless of how anyone wants to define it including those who defend it, is not about respectful introspection when someone passes...its about taking a story and milking the last dollar out of it..disgusting...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:24 PM
Response to Original message
23. k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
26. K&R
Corporate McPravda zombies on as the Press Corpse,
stepping over and past the victims of a shredded Constitution.

Thank you for a most excellent essay, NanceGreggs.
Truly appreciate that you have spelled it out so concisely, clearly and completely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gidney N Cloyd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:36 PM
Response to Original message
28. Thank you, Nance, for throwing your weight and wording behind what many tried to say.
I'll bet even some of the hardcases wish they'd taken a step back and put things the way you did.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
curious one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:39 PM
Response to Original message
29. Thanks. Food tv looks good these days!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sunnyshine Donating Member (698 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:44 PM
Response to Original message
31. I can K&R this one. Well said all the way around. Respectful and truthful.
Thanks Nance. :hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madamesilverspurs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:45 PM
Response to Original message
32. The death throes of legitimate journalism in MSM
helped, in a way, to announce the void that the nascent internet began to fill. I think we can all be thankful that those who own our traditional media institutions were either unconcerned about that development or unable to comprehend its import. Had they seen it coming and nipped it in the bud we would be in profoundly worse shape than we are in now. Even so, the sheer grossness of the machinations of corporate/government controls of our "news" mechanisms exceeds the worst scenarios attributed to the evil of 'liberal' Hollywood.

News of Russert's passing was a shock. But it was not an earth-shaking crisis. His colleagues are certainly expected to express their grief and to memorialize him in some fashion; it's normal and cathartic. But how much catharsis is accomplished in hour-after-hour, day-after-day maundering?

Even more disconcerting is that we are surprised by such interminable wallowing. After all, these are the same people who dither for months on end over Britney or Madonna or Lindsey, enjoying excited conversations about who will get voted off Survivor or American Idol, all while failing to cover events of genuine importance. They lost a colleague, a boss, a friend - we get it. What they don't get is, to put it a bit brutally, we lost one of the guys whose job it was (ostensibly, anyway) to bring us the news. We understand their loss and sympathize, but the news is still happening. So, wallow away. We'll change the channel, or better yet, turn off the television and go to the internet to stay informed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:47 PM
Response to Original message
33. A pleasure to agree with you so very fully
I've taken issue with some of your Primary postings, but on this, you said it and said it very well. I could not agree more nor could I phrase it better.
I hardly ever watched him. I will not notice that he is gone. He added nothing to the discourse but lies and a dumb show for the groundlings, an amazing amount of whom are also DUers. I am a tad shocked that so many are so fooled by the bright lights.
I said earlier today on another thread, I'd like to see just a fraction of this attention given to even one of our dead volunteer military men or women. Or even better, to one who has lost a limb or two. Russert sat in luxery and security, surrounded in fact by armed gaurds in his work place. He was paid millions of dollars. He sat on his ass and pontificated and lent credibility to criminals, as a way to sell advertizing space for his Corporate masters. He sold ad space. And they continue to use his corpse to sell more. I wonder if even one of these 'journalists' weeping away for days over their pal will think to donate the fees for those days to a suitable charity, or do they really think mourning for money is ethical? Do they feel good about accepting more money than most make in a month to harp about how sad they are, how unconsolable? No, they will cash the checks, head home to the penthouses and say "Tim who?" in a day or so. Save those after his job, they are already saying "Tim who".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
puebloknot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:47 PM
Response to Original message
34. K&R Unvarnished truth, this! One of your best! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 09:55 PM
Response to Original message
36. Thank you! I recommend all on DU who has been extolling Russert for his fairness, search DU.
Especially Sundays and read the responses to Meet The Press. There always were. Many DUers are truly schooled in the Real facts and it was so very easy to see how Russert softballed members of this sociopath administration that he interviewed, along with other warmongering Repukes.

You can also see how ruthless he was with Dems.

It was disgraceful.

I remember when Bruce Springsteen gave that rocking concert on The Today Show..he kept playing and playing. Russert was in the audience glowing with joy while watching Springsteen. Meanwhile, Springsteen played 2 decidedly anti-war songs and I was so pissed that Russert, who helped the war along, just didn't get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ladym55 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:08 PM
Response to Original message
38. Thanks, Nance
You have a knack of saying what I've been thinking ... and saying it very well.

Over the weekend, I was asking many of the questions you asked. I saw two news items that really hit me hard. One was about the funeral of a young serviceman from Taunton, MA who was killed in Iraq. He leaves behind a wife and a baby. The other was little article about Tim Russert's "quiet" Nantucket retreat, worth $7+ million.

The Russert family did very well as Washington insiders.

And the policies that Mr. Russert promoted left a young woman without a husband and a baby without a dad. Where is the 24 hour grief for that family?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greyghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:09 PM
Response to Original message
39. Thank you, thank you, thank you! eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DearAbby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:14 PM
Response to Original message
40. Awesome post....as always...n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:19 PM
Response to Original message
41. Excellent as always. Please consider sending this to Keith Olbermann
I was offended by the fact that he went on to DailyKos to chew out people who dared to post truthful accounts of Russert's career. I realize he is grieving, but he should know better than that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #41
47. did he really do that?
i know someone said: how can we go on?
how can there be an election without tim?
i don't know what we're going to do.

i know he said at least one of those things.

and i thought: drama queen!

i like keith, but last friday made me say: oh please!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #47
49. Last Friday, I would understand anything on their part. Later... not so much.
I had a co-worker die on the job, and we were just dazed for the first day or two. Those guys should not have even been on the air at that point.

But the weekend Keith went on the *internet*, and was shocked -- SHOCKED -- that some people were being insensitive. So Keith chewed people out for telling the truth about a public figure, and in the process immediately made the discussion about KO instead of about Russert and his career.

If Russert had been a real journalist, he would have been embarrassed for Keith.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XtraProudDem Donating Member (145 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #49
248. Keith's comments
online were brief, and really no big deal.

Why do they bother you so much?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #248
277. They bother me because they are bullying, anti-democratic and fundamentally misguided
Not everyone on Kos has a nightly national news program. If Keith wants to make his views known, he has plenty of outlets to do so. For him to come onto an anonymous forum and start bashing posters -- however briefly -- goes against everything he usually stands for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XtraProudDem Donating Member (145 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #277
345. He suggested...
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 02:41 PM by XtraProudDem
they they talk about the topic some other time - after he was through mourning his friend. Let the guy have some feelings, for crying out loud.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progdonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #41
55. question: are you sure that was Keith?
Are there some major hurdles to jump over to prove your identity to post on that site? Or could anyone just call himself "Keith Olbermann" and say whatever he wanted?

Yeah, I'm sure Keith has better things to do than go on DailyKos and chew people out, just as sure as I am that there are people out there who have nothing else to do but go on DailyKos and pretend to be Olbermann.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #55
59. KO has an account and posts there often.
It's pretty indisputable that it really is him, since he's posted previews of his special comments, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progdonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #59
70. well, he's probably not in the best mood right now...
I can't really feel too disappointed or angry towards him about it, since he actually knew Russert. Also, I'd count him as an exception to the whole "cry for Russert but not for the troops" criticism that's being leveled at the MSM. Keith has done a huge amount of good, real journalism on his show, so I think he should be given a pass on the criticism about overdoing the Russert eulogizing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #70
72. Hey, KO is one of my (very few) heroes. But he did a dumb thing here.
The only reason I point it out is that his anger at the honest discussion of Russert's career is being sanctimoniously pointed to as a way to discourage any negative posts on Russert's so-called journalism.

You probably already saw this post (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph... ), currently occupying the top spot on the Greatest Page. Personally, I think it's shameful to let an aggrieved celebrity discourage people from honest debate -- no matter what the subject.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progdonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:56 PM
Response to Reply #72
91. yeah, that was a weirdly ironic post...
"AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH, WHY WON'T YOU RUSSERT-HATERS BE RATIONAL... AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH" ;)

My view of this whole thing is that it's kind of like if someone says that her five-year-old daughter is a piano prodigy (like they seem to have annually on Oprah and other shows), and when you hear them, it sounds... like a five-year-old playing piano. I wouldn't unprovoked say a five-year-old sucks at piano, because she's just five, but when she's being held up as some sort of prodigy but she's really just average, I have to point out that she's really not that good, and in fact, she's rather mediocre.

I wouldn't really care one way or another how different people handle Russert's death and wouldn't just come out and criticize him after his death, but when you have so many people on TV and here on DU hold him up as this paragon of journalism, talking about how hard-hitting his interviews were, and he pulled no punches, etc., you just have to stop them and say, "Um, no. He really wasn't a good journalist. In fact, he was actually kind of a hack, and arguably the exact opposite of what a journalist should aspire to be." If his defenders don't like hearing the critical truth, maybe they shouldn't be making stuff up about how great he was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DearAbby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:25 PM
Response to Original message
42. Did they go on like this for Peter Jennings?...n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #42
362. What shall we expect for Barbara Walters --- or Rush Limbaugh!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tutonic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:29 PM
Response to Original message
44. The same kind of public flagellation occurred after 9-11
The MSM has become part of the "journalistic event" being covered. Rather than training the camera on a subject, they berate the public and insist that they must be the subject.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:30 PM
Response to Original message
45. . Isn't this the real legacy of George Bush and Dick Cheney?
Edited on Mon Jun-16-08 10:31 PM by grantcart
that when a fairly decent guy dies that we cannot simply think about that but he has to be evaluated on how effective he was in exposing their crimes and their lies?

Let me put this another way. If Al Gore had taken the oath of office in 2001 Russert would have been viewed as a great journalist.

The path of Bush/Cheney destruction is wide and deep. A number of honorable people failed to believe that Bush/Cheney would use the cover of 911 to manufacture fradulent war.

Your well balanced piece captures Russert's failure. He had a lot of successes as well. I see Russert as another victim of the perifidy of Bush/Cheney.

You lay out a hard metric


I cant help but wonder how many of our own would not have perished if the so-called newsmen who now wail like inconsolable children had, even once, questioned this administrations justification for war, this governments total disregard for the humane treatment of others, this group of war-profiteers who lined their pockets while American troops went into battle without sufficient weapons and body-armour while citizens went hungry, while Iraqi children were mutilated, while torture became acceptable, while the Constitution and the rule of law were cast aside as unworthy of nightly coverage on what is jokingly referred to as the news.



How many Democrats in Congress and the Senate would fail this standard?

If there had been a more organized and united voice by the Democrats (along with some vocal Republicans) wouldn't it have informed people like Russert? Wouldn't MTP have reflected the disagreement in the country, amongst our elected officials, if there had in fact been a stronger response by the Democrats?

How striking it was that we had such an outstanding line of Presidential candidates - and how many of them had to apologize for their votes.

Every word in your OP is true. The ultimate blame however is not with the MSM, or the Democrats who failed to speak out, the blame lies with the Bush/Cheney misuse of power when the country was vulnerable in the midst of great grief and had been sold a bill of goods.

Yes Tim Russert bought the lies and should have asked tougher questions. So should have the Senate and the House.

It does in fact magnify how very fortunate we are as a party and a country to have somebody that we can follow who in fact has met the high bar that you have applied to the MSM and should have also applied equally to those elected to ask questions who did not.

The country has been mistreated terribly by Bush/Cheney and the casualties are in cemetaries, hospitals, and in careers of promising men and women who missed their mark by trusting their government.

We are very fortunate to have someone who passed your bar to help restore that trust.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tblue37 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #45
104. Tim bought into the role of corporate shill long before Bush/Cheney arrived
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 12:16 AM by tblue37
on the scene. Jack Welch bought TR, lock, stock, and barrel, so he was already in position when Bush/Cheney needed a powerful propaganda conduit. They didn't "make" TR into a corporate shill, but because he was a corporate shill, he helped "make" them, in the sense of helping to create their public image to help sell their policies, including the war, which was of great benefit to TR's employers--GE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Garbo 2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:31 AM
Response to Reply #45
193. Except there were editorial & corporate decisions to not seriously challenge or question
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 05:23 AM by Garbo 2004
the Administration during the build up to war. There was a view that "we know it's going to happen and we don't want to be on the wrong side of this."

And I'm not just pulling this out of my butt. There have been books, articles on the subject, assorted mea culpas by journalists, newspapers.

One example: MSNBC. Jeff Cohen, formerly of FAIR, has written of his experiences on MSNBC, working with Phil Donahue's program, and the strictures MSNBC placed on them re: criticism/questioning of the Bush Administration in the build up to war. Who was not to be on the program, if an antiwar guest was booked, how many war supporters had to be also booked, etc. At the time Donahue's program was MSNBC's highest rated show. A NBC-commissioned study advised that Donahue was a "'difficult public face for NBC in a time of war......He seems to delight in presenting guests who are anti-war, anti-Bush and skeptical of the administration's motives.' The report went on to outline a possible nightmare scenario where the show becomes 'a home for the liberal antiwar agenda at the same time that our competitors are waving the flag at every opportunity.'" Donahue's program was canceled in February 2003. (Link to quoted material: http://www.allyourtv.com/0203season/news/02252003donahu... )

Another example, if recollection serves: at the WaPo Walter Pincus' articles that included info that questioned/contradicted the Administration's claims regarding Iraq (using sources in American intelligence) were often relegated to the back pages. In one instance the WaPo wasn't going to publish one of Pincus' articles until Woodward interceded. It was published but in the back pages.

In contrast, Knight-Ridder was notable for its prewar reporting. It didn't merely take dictation from Administration officials and Chalabi and his ilk. It committed journalism: investigative reporting, independent of Administration spokespersons. Here's a link to a recent blog by the Knight Ridder team (now McClatchy) on what they reported: http://washingtonbureau.typepad.com/nationalsecurity/20... .

There have been mea culpas and criticism by the media on their prewar reporting. The NYT, WaPo and others. (More recently, even Katie Couric.) IIRC it wasn't so much "we were fooled" because they were believers but "we dropped the ball, we weren't skeptical enough." But it was more than that...skeptics, dissenting voices, experts in WMD etc., were available. But they rarely were given significant exposure and credibility in the media. That wasn't accidental. If they appeared on TV, for example, they were "balanced" and outnumbered by war hawks and retired generals spoonfed by the Pentagon to parrot propaganda. Not fair or balanced. Dissent was "unpatriotic."

Perhaps one of the first notable articles on the subject was "Now They Tell Us," a 2004 article by Michael Massing in the NY Review of Books. http://www.williambowles.info/media/massing_media.html

Bill Moyers' "Buying the War" transcript and video available at PBS' website: http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/btw/watch.html

More recently, Scott McClellan of all people, elicited howls from some in the media when he suggested they didn't do their job sufficiently. So on that occasion and as a result, Glenn Greenwald interviewed Jeff Cohen and blogged in Salon. His blog has links to the Cohen interview audio and other articles/info. (I'm a Salon member but I think a non member can read the articles by simply letting an advert play.) http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/05/30/cohen...

I would suggest that anyone who claims to be an independent, impartial journalist with an inquisitive mind in search for the truth cannot credibly simply claim "I was fooled, I believed." I'm not particularly extraordinary, did not have the vast resources of a major news organization and yet, I was skeptical. More than skeptical when an Administration clearly launched a campaign to lead us into war. It was marketing a product and on what basis? I read not just the Judy Millers but also Knight Ridder, Pincus, foreign press, Scott Ritter, IAEA info, a variety of sources. Am I to believe that professional big name journalists near or at the top of their respective food chains are simply naive and credulous and had no way to ask the questions and seek out people with the answers? When I buy a used car, I don't just take the word of the seller and his friends and family, I take it to my mechanic and have it checked out. When a high paid corporate journalist wanted to find out the "truth" of the need to go to war, who did he/she ask? Most often, the Administration that was making the case for war and its supporters and adherents. If that's their idea of "due diligence" I have some used cars they should look at. There some some known knowns and some known unknowns and some unknown unknowns about them, but hey they're a great deal. Trust me.

(And as for Congress, they weren't all fooled, merely hapless gulls, and believers. No accident that Bush pushed for a vote right before the 2002 elections. Profiles in courage most of them were not.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
me b zola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #193
288. Excellent post worthy of it's own nomination for greatest page
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crickets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #288
364. Agreed. -nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #193
290. adn again how many leaders of the Democratic Party would have failed that test?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Garbo 2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #290
413. Not "would have," but did. Congress as a whole failed in its consitutional duty on so many matters.
There were some dissenters, but as with the corporate media in general, they largely went along. Ceded their constitutional power and responsibility to an imperial presidency.

And when the government goes mad, that's not an excuse for the media largely to go along, serving as a giant megaphone to "catapult the propaganda." What do we call that when it happens in other countries?

How many stories were not told by the corporate media when it mattered? Various outlets/journos as previously noted did their mea culpas after it was evident that the Iraq "intervention" was not going the way the Administration assured us it would.

But what about afterward? I recall Time mag, CBS and the NYT admitted to sitting on stories detrimental to the Bush Administration before the 2004 election. CBS didn't run its postponed piece on the Niger yellowcake fraud because it claimed it was now too close to the election and didn't want to perhaps influence the outcome. Time also held a piece because it said they didn't want to possibly influence the election. (I found those to be remarkable statements for a frequently self-congratulatory press that claims it serves the public's right and need to to know. But these outlets made these statements without any sense of irony.) The NY Times sat on Risen's illegal wiretapping story for over a year (urged to do so by Bush) and only eventually "broke" the story in December 2005 when they were about to be scooped by their reporter's book publication. ("State of War" is a good read. How much of the info from 2002/2003 in the book was contemporaneously in the hands of the NYT? The NYT and Risen wouldn't say. There was an agreement between them not to publicly discuss the "internal deliberations" of the NYT.)

Blame Bush and Cheney? Sure. Blame complicit politicians? Sure. But also blame a complicit corporate press who as we have seen had the giant megaphone, the resources and the means to find and tell the truth (and in many instances had the truth at the time) but largely chose not to do so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #193
365. The corporations aren't hiring hosts who won't do their dirty work . . .
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 04:49 PM by defendandprotect
And, agree re Congress --- they aren't so dumb as to be fooled ---
but they knew that the corporate-press was going to Shaivo/Swiftboat whatever Cheney/Bush
told them about the war and that the public would be sufficiently confused ---

I don't entirely believe the polls about how many Americans believed this hogwash leading
up to the war -- because I think Americans are smarter than what they indicate and because
the anti-war movement was so large ---

Congress didn't want to face the right-wing corporate-press ---
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phred42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:30 PM
Response to Original message
46. Well Done NG! - Thanks
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:40 PM
Response to Original message
48. You're not a journalist so ...
you wouldn't understand the job Tim Russert had to do every week. That's part of the problem with most people who like to consider themselves "informed." Whether they recognize it or not, they are "informed" largely by journalists, who do the thankless work of dealing with politicians and the like on a daily basis and then get chastised for it by a public who always thinks they could have done a better job. I think you should start reading more, because there is a hell of a lot of great journalism out there, including outlets that you may consider main stream. I never watched much of Tim Russert's show but I can bet there were some very informative moments in it. Unfortunately for you and your like, they were totally missed. Maybe someday people will start realizing the value hardworking journalists do, day in and day out for very little pay, constant stress, and very little appreciation. Oh, and remember, the job of journalism is a fundamental aspect of democracy, so as long as you continue to denigrate it, you're simply contributing to the erosion of all the best values that this country was founded upon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xiamiam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #48
52. you gotta be kidding...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #52
56. Not a bit
If you were paying attention for the past several years, you would have noticed that newspapers across the country - the world in fact - have had their newsrooms gutted. That's a result partly of corporate ownership, but also of a lagging appreciation for what journalists do on a daily basis. I would know because I am one of those journalists. As long as people continue to espouse such views as all the main stream media is crap then the more newspapers are going to falter. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. As question: when's the last time you actually subscribed to a newspaper?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anniebelle Donating Member (701 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:43 AM
Response to Reply #56
197. I have two newspapers delivered to my door every day for years.
I've been paying oh so close attention these last 30 years and I will have to say -- you are full of yourself. I've watched Tim Russert fawn all over his 'chosen ones' for years also. So, you have obviously been hanging out with some ill-informed bloviaters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emanymton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 05:12 AM
Response to Reply #56
203. Try Learning From The BBC. - Hurricaneric
.

Talking heads are not journalists, they are tele-prompter readers. For news one only has to go to:

http://news.bbc.co.uk /

Mr Russert was a talking head. Now he is dead. May Allah rest his soul. He will be replaced by another talking head.

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:33 AM
Response to Reply #203
228. If you followed the posts
You would see that I listen to NPR (which broadcasts and hour of the BBC) every day. My problem with Nance's post is that she uses Tim Russert's death to take down the ENTIRE MSM, which the BBC could be considered a part of.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skidmore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #228
306. The entire MSM deserves harsh criticism and has forgotten that it
is the Fifth Estate charged with shining a light on corruption and printing truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #228
390. No, your real problem is that you feel you haven't had enough attention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HEyHEY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #56
315. Did you see my post the other day?
You can't tell these people anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #315
347. Who are "these people?" Democrats? Progressives? DUers? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HEyHEY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #347
359. DUers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #359
366. Sounds like a horrible group of people. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #48
54. Did you forget the "sarcasm" thingy?
"I never watched much of Tim Russert's show but I can bet there were some very informative moments in it."???

"Maybe someday people will start realizing the value hardworking journalists do, day in and day out for very little pay, constant stress, and very little appreciation."

I appreciate that Tim Russert, and his MSM colleagues, have struggled to raise families on Caviar Helper, margarine instead of butter, and suffer from the kind of lack of appreciation that results in non-stop eulogizing that the Queen of England can only dream about when she shuffles off to the Great Beyond.

Yes, "journalism" is a fundamental aspect of democracy - which is why I denigrate its total absence from the media.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #54
63. So when you refer to the MSM
what exactly do you include? The NY Times? Television news? Maybe just cable? Come on! I don't want to see any blanket statements such as the MSM, that's throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #63
69. My definition of the "MSM" is quite succinct these days ...
... every talking-head who ever cheerleaded a war while failing to ask the pertinent questions about why, who put their corporate paycheck above their responsibility to the public, who were willing to "look the other way" while this Administration "did away" with the Constitution and the rule of law, who reported the news as it was told to them without any further investigation into the reliability of the source that "news" came from, who felt that the bottom-line of their sponsors outweighed the telling of the truth to their audience/readers ...

Need I go on?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:22 PM
Response to Reply #69
73. I wonder
how many reporters make your list? Sounds subjective and apt to change. Maybe one day they're on your list and the next they're off. That's the thing about being a journalist, you never please everybody and always piss somebody off, if you're doing your job.
Now, that being said, I agree there are constant failings in the press. But I don't think that can always be attributed to the journalists themselves and to an extent its unavoidable. There will always be mistakes, big and small, a fact that is exacerbated by the gutted newsrooms I referred to earlier.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #73
75. Just tell me the truth ...
... whether I want to hear it or not. Simple enough.

Telling me how well things are going in Iraq is not a mistake; it's a LIE. And a real journalist knows the difference between the two.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:33 PM
Response to Reply #75
77.  A real journalist would never ...
tell you how anything is going. They would tell you how other people think things are going.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #77
78. That's nowhere near a "real journalist" ...
... but please continue to enjoy what you think "journalism" is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #78
79. So you're saying ...
that a journalist should tell you their opinion of the world? Wrong. Journalists aren't pundits, they're reporters. That's the distinction very few can make nowadays.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #79
363. You seem very confused.
Are you telling us that we must appreciate all the 'reporters' that forego research and investigation in favor of government/corporate propaganda?

Are you trying to make the claim that Russert did employ sound journalistic standards yet still managed to toe the administration line?

Have you also been living in a cave for the past decade?

That would be your only worthwhile excuse.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #363
376. I'm saying
that you can't discount the whole of the media because you think some journalist failed in their reporting. It's unbelievable how so many can miss the obvious.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #376
403. Then you need to read the OP more throroughly...
as though you were a journalist or something...

It's pretty explicit about describing exactly what 'journalists' and media sources are responsible here.

Hint; the ones who lied.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #78
82. And this coming from someone with ...
how many years of reporting experience?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #82
87. I don't know ...
Edited on Mon Jun-16-08 11:51 PM by NanceGreggs
... you never mentioned how many years of reporting experience you have, so I can't comment on your expertise.

As for myself, I have zero years of news reporting experience. I also have zero years of carpet installation experience - but I tend to notice the big lump in the middle of the dining room broadloom, and the fact that my dog is missing, and am able connect the two.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #87
90. Exactly!
You don't have any journalism experience. so you expect journalists to be pundits just like yourself. Unfortunately for you, but fortunately for our democracy, that's not what we're trained to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:02 AM
Response to Reply #90
93. You just finished telling me that ...
"A real journalist would never tell you how anything is going. They would tell you how other people think things are going."

If that's your idea of a "journalist", you must be extremely happy with the current state of the MSM.

I have no idea why you're wasting valuable time posting here. FOX-News is on - ya don't want to miss it, do ya?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #93
105. Um ... actually
I read. I read the Wash. Post, The NY Times, the Boston Globe, and Politico.com every day (not to mention listen to NPR religiously). And despite the fact that I've only posted on DU a handful of times, I've been visiting this site for years. So the fact that I take exception to your tirade about the MSM in the wake of Tim Russert's death I'm sure is a insult to your sensibilities, but I could give a sh*t.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:22 AM
Response to Reply #105
112. "I could give a sh*t."
Finally, we agree on something. I am so glad to know you actually READ things - as opposed to the rest of us here who don't share your adoration of the MSM, because we are illiterate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #112
118. Wow
So, you're saying you don't read the NY Times, the Washington Post, The Boston Globe or Politico.com and discount them all as part of the MSM, that you so despise? No wonder this country is full of so many uniformed people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #118
122. Aw wassa matta?? Having some relevance issues in your daily life?
Write some longer pieces and post them here mr/ms journalist.....

You can dish it, lets see what you can do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:36 AM
Response to Reply #122
124. Here's just one to whet your pallet

posted on this very website:

There is no level too low, no topic out of bounds, and no such thing as fair play when it comes to Republicans who want power. Anyone who stands in the way of their quest - some might call it a crusade - is bound to be the target of an onslaught of personal attacks. Even fellow Republicans aren't immune.

John McCain became the subject of attacks from the Bush campaign in the Republican Presidential primary of 2000. After winning New Hampshire, McCain was set to win South Carolina, which purportedly would have sealed his victory over Bush. Almost immediately, rumors started to fly and McCain's image took a bare-knuckle hit on the jaw. His military record, his sanity, even his sexuality and fidelity were questioned. Many people believe Bush's campaign architect, Karl Rove, was behind the attacks although it was never proved. Ultimately, McCain lost South Carolina and the Republican nomination went to Bush.

The next Republican opponent to be subjected to bitter personal attacks was Max Cleland. In his 2002 Senate race against Saxby Chambliss, Cleland was undermined by a misleading and slanderous advertisement, which juxtaposed Cleland's image with that of Osama bin laden and Saddam Hussein. The advertisement also accused Cleland of voting against the creation of the Department of Homeland Security when in fact he supported the idea even before President Bush did. Right-wing political shock pundit, Ann Coulter, also suggested Cleland didn't deserve the title of "war hero." However, Unlike Chambliss, Cleland served honorably in Vietnam and received the Bronze Star and the Silver Star for his service and dedication to the country. Chambliss ultimately won the election in a surprising victory over Cleland, which helped Republicans monopolize their control of Congress.

The Republican attack machine was quickly perfecting its ability to raise questions about an opponent's military service and patriotism while tainting their character. By 2004 they had gotten it down to such an art, a new term was coined. They now call it "swift boating."

John Kerry and President Bush's battle for the presidency was a heated one and as Kerry emerged from the presidential debates victorious, he had to contend with the so-called "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth." The Swift Boat Veterans, motivated by big money and a chip on their shoulder, assailed Kerry's war record. With Bush contributors behind them as well as a number of Republican political operatives the Swift Boat Veterans asserted Kerry had betrayed the country in his 1971 Senate testimony regarding war crimes committed during Vietnam. They also suggested Kerry didn't deserve the numerous medals he received for his service to the country, which included three Purple Hearts, a Bronze Star and a Silver Star. Attacks on Kerry's military record helped the Bush Administration retain its position in the White House as half the country writhed in defeat.

In light of all the success Republicans have had smearing their rivals' characters, as well as their military records, it's no surprise they have continued to do so with impunity.

The most recent instances of Republican "swift boating" occurred shortly after John Murtha (D-PA) expressed his view of the Iraq war. Murtha, a long time hawk, called for troops to be redeployed out of Iraq at "the soonest practicable time."

Jean Schmidt (R-OH) was one of the first Republicans to attack Murtha. Schmidt, in effect, called Murtha a cut-and-run coward on the House floor. Afterward, she claimed she didn't know Murtha served in the U.S. Marine Corp for 37 years, retired as a colonel in 1990 and has been a congressman for 31 years. However, the White House did know and decided to attack Murtha regardless. White House spokesman Scott McClellan likened Murtha's stance on the War in Iraq to that of Michael Moore and the extreme left wing of the Democratic Party. Going even further, Cybercast News Service an obviously conservative "news" publication actually claimed Murtha didn't deserve the Purple Hearts he received while serving in Vietnam and insinuated he had actually lied to receive the medals. The fact is, anyone who stands in the way, or dissents from the Republican line, will face personal attacks of an unscrupulous nature from a host of sources.

As the 2006 mid-term election heats up, Republicans will almost certainly renew and increase the political attacks against opponents to their unitary control of government. However, they aren't simply attacking the political opposition, they are attacking the very foundation of American democracy. The one party rule of Republicans has eroded constitutional checks and balances and thoroughly corrupted the party. As the old saying goes, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Remember 9/11 (it happened on Bush's watch), the non-existent WMDs, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, secret torture prisons, misused intelligence reports, CIA leaks, the Abramoff lobbying scandal, Hurricane Katrina, Diebold Inc., NSA warrantless spying and numerous others? In light of so many scandals, the tactics Republicans use to attain power appear minor in comparison to what they do with that power once they get it.

One political party should never control every branch of government. It allows for corruption without accountability and leaves a large portion of the population without adequate representation. If "We the People" cannot reinstate some sense of balance in America, which is a very real possibility thanks to Republican redistricting, our country may well proceed down a road from which there is no return. If that happens the Republican attack strategy will have succeeded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:45 AM
Response to Reply #124
131. Your talent for stating the obvious is breathtaking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #131
139. Typical
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:58 AM
Response to Reply #139
142. Ah. If my response is typical, I'm thinking we now fully understand
your problem with Nance.

She can write. You cannot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #142
144. And that's why I actually do this for a living rather than
sitting at home in my pajamas, writing denigrating posts about a man who just died. Wow I'm should be ashamed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:18 AM
Response to Reply #144
159. Wow, a self-important nobody, that no one has ever heard of
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 01:25 AM by TheWatcher
Thinks we should kiss his ass because he does this for a living, and thinks he can come in here, piss all over everyone else's work and opinions, because he's a REAL JOURNALIST, and because we're all completely CLUELESS to how everything in his profession works.

*Bows down in a hysterical fit of faux worship*

Considering the State of the MSM, you've got nothing to brag about junior.

Go post some more lukewarm gem of obvious on your blog and STFU.

I'm should be ashamed?

:rofl:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:23 AM
Response to Reply #159
163. Excuse me sir
could I get a piece of bread?

You actually think this is pissing on someone else's work?!

"you wouldn't understand the job Tim Russert had to do every week. That's part of the problem with most people who like to consider themselves "informed." Whether they recognize it or not, they are "informed" largely by journalists, who do the thankless work of dealing with politicians and the like on a daily basis and then get chastised for it by a public who always thinks they could have done a better job. I think you should start reading more, because there is a hell of a lot of great journalism out there, including outlets that you may consider main stream. I never watched much of Tim Russert's show but I can bet there were some very informative moments in it. Unfortunately for you and your like, they were totally missed. Maybe someday people will start realizing the value hardworking journalists do, day in and day out for very little pay, constant stress, and very little appreciation. Oh, and remember, the job of journalism is a fundamental aspect of democracy, so as long as you continue to denigrate it, you're simply contributing to the erosion of all the best values that this country was founded upon."


Wow. I guess at least I'm not pissing on anyone's grave.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HEyHEY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #159
318. You all pulled this same shit on me a few days ago when I tried to make the same points
So, that's TWO professionals, plus a few who agreed with me on my initial post.... hmmmm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:35 AM
Response to Reply #144
173. Thank you for sticking up for the deceased.
And I mean that. If Tim Russert wasn't going to do the job he was made to do, someone else would. And someone else will fill his spot.

How was his position created? I wish people would place a little more concern on that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #144
353. People paying you JUST to get them ratings isn't always something to be proud of!
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 03:40 PM by calipendence
There isn't a sense of civic responsibility in many of the MSM newsrooms any more. It's about making money, and many of them don't even deny it any more.

Larisa Alexandrovna, who posts here also, gets paid for her work, works at a place that some might not consider the M$M, though is a staple for most of us here today. She probably gets paid a lot less than many of the dittoheads that work in these other "bastions of journalism" that are known as the MSM companies these days. But many of these folks don't even hold a candle to her work and skills as who Thom Hartmann has proudly called on a number of occasions THE BEST investigative journalist we have out there. Not many are immortalized as being referenced in Dennis Kucinich's 34 counts of impeachment for doing her job (a DAMN GOOD job) of journalism.

Now, you can call me a clueless person too. But I worked in one of the very newsrooms that many people have looked at streaming video the last few days that were close to the floods in Iowa. I also know some of the things behind the scenes there that went on over 25 years ago, and even then, there was a profit pressure on news content. Like making sure stories that made the late night news prioritized themes in the stories that matched the themes of the TV show showing before hand, presumably to hold onto audiences more and keep ratings higher. F journalistic importance in those matters. I also knew people that got laid off then in controversial fashion, when knowing even in advance that any attempts of trying to organize labor in those not well paid operations were going to be met with such actions when there was a lot of consolidation and "agreement" amongst the local media owners then not to talk about such things, even though they'd cover a local meat processing plant union strike where workers were trying to get three times the wages that the suited TV reporter interviewing them was getting paid and trying to keep a straight face.

The ironic thing here, is they are probably getting more hits on their web site and increasing their ratings for just doing their damn job better than their competition. I've looked at it, and they've been doing a great job under trying circumstances. I've seen many other local message boards that have many people across the political spectrum saying the same damn thing. Likewise, if we had a few newspapers out there that did a real bang-up job on covering news, you'd get people subscribing to their newspaper or doing other things to keep it going.

There are great journalists working today on the fringes of the MSM, like those working in the McClatchy Bureau, which evolved from the Knight Ridder Bureau. I remember when I wrote the software that helped them get their stories on the "election pages" of all of the Knight Ridder chain in the 2000 election, and not realizing how big they would become later once they got more exposed. I look back on that experience and was VERY happy that I helped give them more leverage to get greater exposure then when the bureau was first starting up.

Those same tools I wrote then for Knight Ridder I was told privately was going to be used to help them allow larger paper properties to fill in feature pages of other smaller newspaper operations and facilitate layoffs then as well (just like we're seeing in McClatchy now). I felt bad then too, but as far as I knew I was just trying to provide better means to quickly populate content pages in better ways, not to help get rid of people.

The Knight Ridder Bureau in Washington, DC took advantage of the lack of micromanaging with the excessively large segment of VP's who were mostly just editors of other local newspapers who made most of the editorial decisions of content, and therefore who didn't really directly tell these guys what to do. Something like the Knight Ridder Bureau would NEVER have happened in a Roger Ailles organization like News Corp, the way it is run. Though journalists have a tough job managing their situations and not getting sucked into just becoming part of the problem that afflicts the M$M now, they need to constantly push the envelope to take advantage of opportunities like the Knight Ridder Bureau did, push for changes in their profession, or get out and look for other professions if they want to take self pride in being good journalists and not just surrendering to being well paid "stenographers".

I'm all for honoring Tim Russert as being a great journalist and having done quite a bit, but I think the sheer volume of coverage for him, and the lack of much other meaty coverage shows how his death in effect is being USED as a distraction, much like other news topics such as Britney Speers have been in the past. Journalists who are participating in this coverage orgasm should know when to respectfully pull back and get back to their jobs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #353
377. I agree with you
What I don't agree with, and do take personally, is the idea that the ENTIRE msm is worthless, which is what I got from the original post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #377
384. The way it is so widespread and strangling though, it's an apt generatlization to make!

I know some here who work hard as journalists may not like it, and I think they shouldn't take it too personally, because in many cases with the major outlets (which people lump as the M$M, not as much the independents) those in control of the content these days aren't the journalists but the penny pushers.

It IS a wart that journalists must deal with these days or go other places to work, until we can get someone in the White House, decent people in the FCC, and congress, that will do some major reform with our media infrastructure and conditions for licensing the public airwaves, etc. Once that happens, perhaps we'll find more places to work than the McClatchy Bureau for journalists to really show their value, and have it a mainstream purpose of a news organization, not just some unlikely hole in an organization that doesn't have intrusive and destructive corporate oversight coming down on it like McClatchy appears to have now.

Don't be in denial. That's all we ask. I can sympathize with many journalists that are in there and in many cases trying to "fight city hall". I still like reports from top notch folks like Christianne Amanpour or Lara Logan, who try to keep decent journalistic principles despite what happens around them. Sometimes I don't feel they are utilized as well as they could be by the mess we have in terms of news operations now, which is why I mostly use news like Democracy Now to get my news these days instead where I don't have to deal with a rash of pundititry instead of real news reporting. And for many of the journalists working in places like Iraq, it is downright dangerous if they don't just follow the "planned path" given to them as embedded journalists. This war has been the most dangerous of the last two centuries for journalists. You take them aside, and they'd probably admit they're frustrated with the state of news now too, and probably don't try to chant about how good a job they are doing to avoid falsely labeling a broken situation as a good one.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #131
143. What you got big shot?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #143
145. I've got my own loofa.
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 01:04 AM by cliffordu
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:12 AM
Response to Reply #145
151. Oh, and so you know.
My opinion piece that you may or may not have actually read, was posted on DU in 2006. Two years before you were even a member here. Huh, just get enlightened?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #151
153. The length of time you've been here has nothing to do with the
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 01:13 AM by cliffordu
quality of your work. Why bring it up?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:15 AM
Response to Reply #153
156. No, but it has to do with the quality of your opinion ...
In my opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:16 AM
Response to Reply #156
157. Ah.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:49 AM
Response to Reply #151
184. Oh, and so YOU know
I've been a member since 2002, and I scour this Site on a DAILY basis.

Sorry kid, you just aren't that memorable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:51 AM
Response to Reply #184
185. Ouch. That'll leave a mark.....
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:56 AM
Response to Reply #184
186. Well, I'm tired of waiting for the Pizza delivery - I have
an appointment in the morning so I gotta get some sleep -

You kids play nice now, all it takes is one mistake and someone could lose an eye.....


:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #151
339. there are a few good journalists left
being a good journalist to me means that you don't compromise your integrity--good journalists have put their lives on the line for shining a light on corruption and exposing truth--especially when that truth is exposed to protect the people, protect the Constitution--by exposing sleaze gossip, like Britney Spears problems or Paris Hilton's dilemmas does nothing to help the public. My classmate is a good journalist, as a matter a fact, I believe she is a great journalist--she exposed corruption, money laundering and drugs, by a governor (she was warned not to by her fellow journalists) because she would lose access to the political machine-she did it because it was the right thing to do. She was instrumental in exposing the guns for drugs exchange in Mena AR during the Iran Contra expose--her life was threatened for exposing the truth, for exposing corruption. Daniel Casolaro was another great journalist who exposed corruption against the American people. There are a few good journalists left who have put their lives on the line to expose the truth to the public--I honor them and their memory. But what passes as much journalism today, to me, is just a PR scheme to SELL something to the public, be it a war or the great economy. AS * said they must "catapult the propaganda" and in order to do that you must have mouthpieces. I laugh everytime I watch these talking heads on TV stating the exact same meme straight from a Republican theme. It's like during the 2000 election, turn to any station and it was the exact same BS--Gore is boring, Gore is a liar--* is a great guy, he's a down home guy you'd just love to have a beer with him. The corruption investigations of his two choices as Dept. of labor and Housing, not a word mentioned--his educational and environmental records as governor barely mentioned--or the lies were not confronted. His drug/alcohol use, new DL, military record, alleged insider trading (that would make M. Stewart look like a saint)-barely mentioned-his answers to allegations just accepted. I'm with Nance--in this country the great journalists don't have a wide enough platform to be heard or they are dead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:05 AM
Response to Reply #143
146. that's what I thought
more of the same. That's why I don't post on this site very often. It's populated by a**holes, who think they'll save the world by preaching to the choir.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #146
150. Maybe we'd be more civil if you refrained from attacking one of the best
journalists on these boards.

Her writing is at once truthful, bold, unique, earnest, fearless and succinct.

The truth of what she writes goes beyond simple fact into emotional and spiritual truth: Her veracity is beyond reproach.



You? Not so much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #150
152. Yeah
attacking the "MSM" is so unique.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:18 AM
Response to Reply #150
158. And who's we...
as far as I'm concerned, you're the only one denigrating a piece of work that I put time and effort into, which was published on DU back in 2006 when they actually featured writers rather than simply bloggers who could post as much crap as they wanted to. But you wouldn't know that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:23 AM
Response to Reply #158
164. Yeah, on one hand, Democratic Party politics like entropy, is a bitch.
On the other hand, we bow to your greatness....

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OutaTowner Donating Member (21 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #164
256. Entropy?
So you're saying that the Democratic Party works better/proceeds forward when there is more chaos and randomness in the system?

Sorry, maybe there is another way of using the word, but thats how I know it as a chemistry major.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #256
283. It has so far this year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:13 AM
Response to Reply #150
222.  polish off your keyboard for another day
of blogging.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #150
229. Nance said it herself
"As for myself, I have zero years of news reporting experience."

Just remember, blogging is not journalism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElboRuum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #229
313. Neither is what Tim Russert did...
Blogging is punditry. So is the trade plied by those who are on television.

You are right, it is important to separate punditry from journalism. Nance has one thing over on Tim Russert though... Nance never claimed to be a journalist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XtraProudDem Donating Member (145 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:13 AM
Response to Reply #146
253. Excellent.
That was the shortest, most succinct and accurate summation of DU I've seen in a long time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #124
162. And by the way, Murrow Jr., if this is an example of how stellar you can write
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 01:23 AM by TheWatcher
You really should consider a different career.

Or get a job with Fox. They'd just adore a little morsel like you.

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #162
165. Yeah, but like I said earlier, ya gotta whatch out for your loofas....
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:26 AM
Response to Reply #165
166. Maybe Bill got drunk and decided to see what the other side was like
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 01:26 AM by TheWatcher
:rofl:

This guy is GOLD!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #166
170. I haven't had this much fun since the Benny left.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:32 AM
Response to Reply #170
171. Always glad to entertain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #171
175. The problem is, like the film Battlefield Earth, you are unintentionally hilarious
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:26 AM
Response to Reply #162
167. It's an example of my writing at DU
which is limited to opinion. Frankly, you and I both know that you will find anything to criticize me because I don't agree with the idea that the MSM is completely rotten, which unfortunately so many people here at DU have bought into. That's just what those in power want you to think. You got a problem with that, oh well, at least I have the conviction to say so, rather than simply following the herd, whether it be here or elsewhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:29 AM
Response to Reply #167
168. Your warm and runny feelings for the MSM, although charming and
somewhat naive makes me think you just got a gig as an intern at Meat the Press.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #168
176. to actually say Nance is a journalist
is a real laugh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #176
178. To actually say YOU are a journalist
Is an exercise in delusion not seen since Commander Codpiece declared to the world "Mission Accomplished".

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:41 AM
Response to Reply #178
179. Get paid for it 40 hours a week buddy
and it's shit pay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:45 AM
Response to Reply #179
182. "I've known journalists, sir, and you are no journalist"
I never met a real one that only worked 40 hours a week.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:06 AM
Response to Reply #182
220. Can't read or just an ass?
That's why I said I get PAID for it 40 hours a week.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #220
285. Aren't you supposed to be journaling somewhere??
Is this like scrapbooking?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:46 PM
Response to Reply #182
378. you make my point for me
As I said in my original message was that journalist are overworked, and under-appreciated. Thanks for concurring.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:45 AM
Response to Reply #179
183. Believe me, with writing like that.....
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 01:47 AM by TheWatcher
You're being OVERPAID.

Man, you are a hoot. I guess if we can't laugh, we'd all go insane at this point.

Anyhow, Mr. Wallace, by all means, get back to your self-important world, where none of us could possibly comprehend or understand.

Good Night, And Good Luck.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:07 AM
Response to Reply #183
221. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
HEyHEY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #183
319. Ah yes, the typical response from people here
When arguing with a journalist ALWAYS attack their grammar... so weak.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sammythecat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:11 PM
Response to Reply #179
402. Well, knowing you get paid as a journalist
certainly gives you credibility in my book. I mean, I've been following this thread and getting increasingly annoyed at your persistent obtuseness until you said you were a real live JOURNALIST that gets paid and everything. "Holy shit!", I said to myself, "This guy is a real journalist". Here I was, swallowing everything NancyGreggs dished out, agreeing with everything and cheering her on. I'm such a fool. I thought she was telling the truth about a very talented, skillful, and influential man who would occasionally sell his soul in order to solidify or further his career. I even thought I saw this happen with my own eyes when it appeared he took a dive in his interview of Dick Cheney during the rush to war. It just seemed Tim was accepting of one deadly lie after another, but I guess that's what you get from untrained citizens like myself who aren't PAID JOURNALISTS.

Just a tip, but next time you're tempted to say, "I could give a shit", say instead, " I COULDN'T give a shit". There's a very meaningful difference between the two. Think about this for a minute and it might come to you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #178
180. Were finals over this week? I've noticed more high schoolers around the
convenience store up the street.

Maybe one got lost and wandered in here by accident.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:34 AM
Response to Reply #167
172. Oh please, more, MORE Propaganda, MORE Spin
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 01:36 AM by TheWatcher
It's so LONELY at the Top Of Olympus!

More Women, More Wine!

OK, Bill, What's Next?



Are we talking about the same MSM that Un-repentantly sold this country a War based on lies?

A Media that Goebbels himself could have been proud of, envious of?

While there may still be a few bright and shining lights in this Abyss of Propaganda, Spin, and Nonsense you call a profession, I hardly think you can sit here and tell most of us here on this Site we've got it all wrong and the MSM is just SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO misunderstood.

Render Unto Me A Fucking Break.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #172
174. I'm stealing that - 'render unto me a fucking break'
Very Nice!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #174
177. Steal Away, Good Man, Steal Away. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #174
381. It's nice that you have to result to personal attacks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OutaTowner Donating Member (21 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #172
273. But...
didn't we also have a majority of the senate that was backing and supporting the war? The same senators that were selling the war to us? The same ones who are now realizing that the war is such a terrible idea? 29 of the 50 democratic senators voted for the war.

This country bought the lies that were given out to us by the executive branch. These lies sounded so real and trustworthy that it had the majority of the country going with it. We're especially now finding out through all these books giving first hand accounts of the deceit and the direct over embellishment of facts meant to deceit.

I guess what I'm saying is that we can't completely say the MSM was pushing and selling the war, because all they were doing was "reporting" what was told to them by the White House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #273
335. That's right, they were just "following orders."
Jesus, is it 2008, or 1938?

It's called COMPLICITY.

Look into it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OutaTowner Donating Member (21 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #167
271. Lets see if I got this right..
People are ready to pounce on you for having a different opinion then they do. And therefore because you have a different opinion, they are telling you to go back to FOX...???

I would have liked to think that democrats, or at the very least the people here, were open minded to different opinions. And that close-mindedness was typical of a conservative repub.

I thought your article was well written. And I also like how you give full thought out replies here, while their only rebuttal is finding a reason to laugh at you for some reason. I'd wish their replies actually sounded a tad bit more intelligent instead of just sarcastically saying that they weren't intelligent enough for you...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #162
380. It's nice that you have to result to personal attacks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor Panacea Donating Member (223 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #124
274. I agree with Nance
QUOTE: Scott McClellan likened Murtha's stance on the War in Iraq to that of Michael Moore and the extreme left wing of the Democratic Party. Going even further, Cybercast News Service an obviously conservative "news" publication actually claimed Murtha didn't deserve the Purple Hearts he received while serving in Vietnam and insinuated he had actually lied to receive the medals. The fact is, anyone who stands in the way, or dissents from the Republican line, will face personal attacks of an unscrupulous nature from a host of sources.

Hurricaneric,

I could have pulled any number of quotes from your article, but the text above is representative. You wrote a good article.

The problem is that this is not about you. It is about Russert. I agree completely with NanceGreggs, and I will go even farther. Russert was a media whore. He curried favor with the big shots and apparently saw himself as some kind of diplomat and facilitator whose role was to provide a forum where politicians could tell their lies with very little challenge from him. He was essentially a politician himself, not a journalist. Of course, if it was politically expedient to attack somebody (on the right or the left), then he would do it. He was, as I said, a politician. I saw a clip last night in which he bullied David Duke unmercifully. Well, it was David Duke, so it was politically expedient for him to act that way.

And let us not forget that it was Russert who asked David Kucinich, right out of the blue, with no foundation in the current discussion, whether he had ever seen a UFO. What people may or may not remember about this startling question is that Kucinich, just a few days earlier, had questioned Bush's sanity. Kucinich had made a reference, if I remember correctly, to Bush's ongoing obsession with Iran and to some event involving that obsession. In any case, Kucinich used the word insane in reference to Bush. So what happens a few days later? Good old Tim Russert asks Kucinich, in a presidential debate, whether he has ever seen a UFO. Coincidence? Yeah, sure.

The disappointing thing in the media frenzy over Russert's death is that even the very few talking heads who have dared to be real journalists, people like Keith Olbermann, have also engaged in the public wailing over this whore.

My own journalistic experience? Not much, though I worked with the print media in a couple of capacities in my younger years. In fact, I was sitting at the editorial desk of a state-wide newspaper when Nixon's "Saturday Night Massacre" took place. My own journalistic role in those days was trivial, but I was a witness to the whole Watergate era and saw how real journalism works.

I cannot remember the exact quote, but there is an old saying about journalism that its proper role is to comfort the afflicted and to afflict the comfortable. I am sure that I mangled the quote, and I do not have time to use "the Google," as Bush says.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raineyb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #118
275. Are not three of the sources you cite partially responsible for the ignorace of the American public
in the lead-up to war in the first place?

The New York Times was pushing Judith Miller's claims of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and that turned out to be one steaming pile of crap.

Ignoring anti-war protests, ignoring experts :cough: Scott Ritter :cough: who had said that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. Taking talking points from the administration, "reporting" on the as coming from anonymous sources then allowing the administration to use the unnamed source in the article as proof of their assertion. That is exactly what is wrong with the MSM and it hasn't changed.

So, aren't you just making Nance's point for her?

Regards
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #105
342. since you listen to NPR religiously
then, you know it has changed over the years. I've listened to NPR then and now--and it has changed--it's amazing that during some of the interviews, they also let certain fabrications slide instead of jumping on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XtraProudDem Donating Member (145 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #93
254. That's too bad...
It's disappointing that you would use the "FOX News is on" reply, Nance. I seriously mean that.

This guy has got you on what journalism is. But you accuse him of being a FOX news watcher. Just like I was accused of being a "Freeper" and a "DLCer" because I had the gall to try to defend the honor of a DEAD MAN.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:27 AM
Response to Reply #90
117. You are a journalist like I'm Betty Paige.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SemperEadem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #90
316. you are confused
You don't have any journalism experience
Yes she does. She's been writing for years.

What you mean to say is that she doesn't have any experience working in a MSM environment--well, guess what? She doesn't need to have that to be a journalist. A journalist writes. That's what Nance does--and she does it quite well.

Instead of attacking her character like you do, stick to the topic.... oh yeah, you can't refute what she has written because it's all true.

The internet has blown that exclusive club's doors off its hinges--one doesn't have to draw their paycheck from the Times to be a journalist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #316
379. I attack the notion that all main stream media is bad
I do my best not to attack the person, unlike some others on this board. Kinda sad, considering this is supposed to be my political party. I also thought it was the party of intelligent individuals, but instead so many buy into similar criticisms of the media like the right wingers that claim the media is liberal. What the attack on the media does is make it easier for the public to reject factual reports, like the NY times report of the Pentagon propaganda machine. That took two years of reporting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swagman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #87
246. love that one !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SemperEadem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #82
314. more than you
and before you get your panties in a knot, I've been in the business for over 25 years, and Nance is spot on in everything she has said, so now what do you have to say?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #77
96. then you are no journalist despite your claim
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #96
100. And I'm sure you think ...
Keith Olberman is the cat's meow. But the fact is, journalists (AKA reporters) are supposed to tell you what other people think, rather than what they think, that's the nature of reporting. We aren't paid to give our opinion. That's the point. Can't get it? Or do you have a problem getting from A to B?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:27 AM
Response to Reply #100
116. A journalist digs up facts despite what other people think or say.
If you simply report what one side says and what the other side says, you're doing so without a frame of reference to facts. If person A said the levees are not fixed, and person B said the levees are fixed, from that frame of reference, people would be left to guess who is lying, unless the journalist reports that the levee was fixed with old newspapers like in this local piece from New Orleans:

http://www.wwltv.com/local/stories/wwl042408tpleveepape...

Now THAT is a big story. I haven't seen this on CNN or FOX.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #116
123. research is part of journalism
But writing opinion is not. Typical spin job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:47 AM
Response to Reply #123
136. Personally, what I object to in the corporate outlets skimming over news.
A good example would be when the Military Commissions Act passed in 2006.

There was no real in-depth coverage from sources like CNN or FOX from what I could see even though sections of that Act could theoretically be used to strip US citizens of habeas corpus rights. I had to dig up information at the ACLU website and from reporters like Robert Perry.

What I worry about is people who aren't interested in the law or people who don't have the time to do dig up the news like this. Those people, who probably rely on TV news, are being left in the dark, I'm afraid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:53 AM
Response to Reply #136
140. I agree wholeheartedly
But I still think there are some good tv journalists out there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:06 AM
Response to Reply #140
147. Eh, I have more faith in foreign outlets. I like folks like Sy Hersh though. He's a good one. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #147
148. I subscribe to the New Yorker
Unfortunately I don't read it as often as I wish I could. He hasn't come out with anything in some weeks now, huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #148
149. Yeah, with Hersh, the downtime between stories can be long, but I don't mind.
If he's working on a big story, I'd rather he spend time fact-checking everything before he lets it rip.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #149
154. No doubt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #100
125. Journalists tell you what others think?You only know what others say
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #125
127. And if they say lies a real journalist investigates and tells you what they think about those lies
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #127
129. based on the facts they discover from investigasting those lies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #129
130. You sound like a pompous ass who doesn't know shit about journalism
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #130
133. Nobody can tell you what another person is thinking, only what they are thinking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:47 AM
Response to Reply #133
135. Great post Greggs, some people have a natural jounalistic gift
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:47 AM
Response to Reply #135
138. And some people stuggle very hard just to criticize them. Hugs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #127
134. wrong again
real journalists are supposed to tell you what the evidence shows about those lies, rather than what they think. And that's the best part about journalism. Opinion isn't involved so the truth can't be belittled. And that's what's wrong with journalism today. It's filled with so much opinion, nobody trusts it anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Number23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 02:42 AM
Response to Reply #134
188. Hi Hurricaneric
First off, thanks for your discussion here. I think it's great to have this level of discourse on something as important as journalism. I think you're right in that by virtue of the fact that you had the gall to disagree with Nance, whom I personally think has moments of distinct and profound greatness with her writing, you will be vilified by the folks who think her every word is gospel.

I too am a trained journalist, both in education and in career and I understand precisely what you mean in that a journalist's job is not to express his or hers feelings or interpretation of what's going on but merely to report on what's happening. But you cannot possibly negate the impact of research and in the absence of truthful information, a certain amount of analysis in the job -- elements that I believe Nance was saying were lacking from Russet's performance. I didn't watch MTP that often so I don't know if that's true or not but I think she's entitled to her opinion. I am more of a newspaper and online newsreader myself because in my opinion, broadcast news is too sensationalized, sanitized, and corporatized (I kind of just made that word up) for my tastes and I say that having first worked as a tv newswriter and photographer.

Yes, the job of a journalist is difficult and mostly thankless but that's because it's SUPPOSED to be. It is one of the most important industries in this country and impacts countless others. That's one of the reasons it's so discouraging to see folks get these jobs with no training just because they look good on television or are friends with the big dogs at the networks or are so controversial, people think it will bring up ratings. But that's a discussion for another day.

Please don't be put off by the naysayers. Your comments have been very interesting and the discussion has been entertaining. Besides, Nance seems perfectly capable of taking care of herself in a battle of wits with anyone on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:25 AM
Response to Reply #188
225. Of course not.
research is essential to being a good journalist. I would never say otherwise. The unfortunate thing for a majority of journalists these days is that we don't have the time or resources to do our jobs as good as we could due to daily, or weekly quotas, short-staffed offices and the like.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OutaTowner Donating Member (21 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #134
278. Merriam-Webster Definition of Journalism
"2 a: writing designed for publication in a newspaper or magazine b: writing characterized by a direct presentation of facts or description of events without an attempt at interpretation"

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/journalism
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SwiperFox Donating Member (55 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 05:30 AM
Response to Reply #100
205. Are you sure?
A journalist does not report what others think. That is a propagandist's job. A journalist reports the FACTS. Cold, hard, unadulterated facts. Good, bad, pleasant or offensive. It does not matter. No opinion pieces and no coercive editorials. FACTS!

Do the country a favor and learn how to do your job properly or change professions, kiddo. The M$M is full of propagandists and you are not very persuasive. How about becoming a real journalist? :patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:31 AM
Response to Reply #205
227. thanks for the advice pops
but that's exactly what I was saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:42 AM
Response to Reply #205
232. a journalist always has to report
what other people think. That fact doesn't negate their drive to get facts by doing research, which is obvious. You wanna jump on a thread of a conversation I was having with Nance, that's cool but your insults are typical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SwiperFox Donating Member (55 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 03:01 AM
Response to Reply #232
408. Too bad...
Reporting what people think as a large group is part of divulging the facts. Such as, what is the common feeling amongst most Sunnis over Shias. The problem comes when reporting becomes the actual push of an agenda such as the rw talking points, a task that our m$M has perfected.
I have not tried to insult you, but it sure figures that you would take my comments as such. Shame on you and those of your ilk!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
klyon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #100
309. I have been here as long as anyone, still don't spell well
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 12:31 PM by klyon
and I remember the people of this board had the facts and the figures the the media refused to report. Just stating what someone said is not reporting. Getting to the facts is reporting. If we knew here at DU that everything C. Powell said to the UN was inaccurate and every reason that the President of the United States said in his declaring war speech and his State of the Union address were inaccurate then the MSM should have known and reported it instead of beating the war drum. These are simply the facts.

I will take this opportunity to thank Nancy again for her great contribution to this web site, she is aces with me. Thank goodness for spell checker.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
prairierose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #100
310. eric, reporters are not supposed to tell you what...
other people think. They are supposed to report fact backed up by multiple sources. Once upon a time opinion had no place in news except the editorial pages where it was clearly labeled as opinion.

I couldn't care less what any reporter thinks about anything. I want to know what facts they have found about the story they are reporting. I really do not care what so-called experts they may bring in to bolster a story. We have seen the deterioration of both reporting and experts for some years. Now that the truth has come out about the Pentagon experts used by the corporate media to sell the war, we can see that many other experts used by the media are of the same ilk. Oh, I forgot the corporate media isn't covering the Pentagon experts story. When experts are presented as experts without revealing their ties to the MIC then that is propaganda. The audience has no way to judge their veracity when it does not have all of the facts. When opinion is presented as fact, we have a problem.

I certainly do not read the publications that you cite as new sources in this country. When I want to read news, I go to overseas publications that still employ real reporters instead of corporate whores. I read McClatchy's blog and check out Democracy Now! and other alternative media.

Nance does not call herself a journalist. She knows that she is writing opinion pieces. The fact that you can not seem to tell the difference makes me wonder. Conflating news and opinion is one of the factors that have led us to where we find ourselves today. Your denigration of bloggers in general is typical of the corporate media that has fallen down on the job. today there are blogs that commit journalism by breaking and covering stories that the corporate media does not deign to cover. Thus, many people now visit those blogs to get news. I read the McClatchy blog because they actually cover news and we have learned that the NYT is very influenced not only by their corporate masters but the current administration as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #310
325. and yet
the story about Pentagon influencing the cable television news was broken by the NY times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #310
391. DING DING DING We have a winner!!!
If I wasn't so lazy, this is EXACTLY what I would have liked to write about the little Nance critic.

Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
prairierose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #391
407. you're welcome..n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SemperEadem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #100
332. again, you're confused
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 01:50 PM by SemperEadem
journalists (AKA reporters)

All reporters are journalists.

Not all journalists are reporters.

They are two distinct and different occupations.

Nice try with the non sequitur.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #332
334. From my perspective
I don't agree. A journalist is educated in news gathering and reporting, but that's just splitting hairs. That being said, the blogosphere has played an important role in the media in many ways(by bringing stories to light that would never have been printed, and by forcing the media to do its job)even though it can erode the foundation of professional journalism when news consumers start blurring the lines between opinion and objective reporting
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #334
393. News 'consumers' blur the lines???
Fuck me that's funny!!!

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #96
109. And I suppose you are?
Or are you just someone who thinks they know how everybody should do their job? Because I can't stand those types of people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HEyHEY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #96
321. No, he's exactly right; a journalist editorializing is a major faux pas
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 01:10 PM by HEyHEY
It's how yellow journalism gets going.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frank Lemadeer Donating Member (30 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #77
238. Dang that's funny
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 08:54 AM by Frank Lemadeer
A real journalist would never tell you how anything is going. They would tell you how other people think things are going.

So a real journalist is one who stands in neck deep water in Iowa and won't say there's a flood. Dang that's funny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:00 AM
Response to Reply #238
245. Um, yeah ...
That's exactly what I was saying.

I'll say it again, but you may miss the point anyway: Journalists aren't pundits, they're reporters. That's the distinction very few can make nowadays.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frank Lemadeer Donating Member (30 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #245
298. I missed no point
We've been in neck deep water for a while and our "journalists" wouldn't say there's a flood. "Journalists aren't pundits" is a shallow (no pun intended) excuse for not telling the obvious truth. Or for repeating scurrilous lies and not challenging them or calling them lies.

It's journalistic moral bankruptcy and cowardice masking as journalistic integrity if some corporatist leader whips it out and pisses down my leg while the mouthpiece journalist says "according to our sources, that's just rain."

But, hey, they get to keep their jobs. And even get raises. And days of national TV eulogy.

Not to worry though. I have a sneaking suspicion that they'll suddenly agonize over these failures, magically find their moral compasses, repent, and become tireless and aggressive investigators and reporters of wrongdoing once democrats sweep to power this November.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OutaTowner Donating Member (21 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #238
281. No, Frank
I am pretty sure that was not what he was going with. Using your example, the real journalist would not be standing neck deep in water and talking about how the price of corn is going to sky rocket because of the devastating floods. What the real journalist would be doing is saying how the floods are ruining the crops. They would stop there at that statement, because they do not personally know whether the price of corn is going to change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frank Lemadeer Donating Member (30 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #281
304. Oh Yes, Outa
<i>What the real journalist would be doing is saying how the floods are ruining the crops. </i>

Just like they said there were likely no WMDs. Or how the depletion of National Guard troops left too few resources available here to deal with our own emergencies. Or how the war was depleting the economy. Or how dangerous the suspension of habeas corpus is for all Americans. Or how warrantless wiretapping violates all our rights. Or that torture is just wrong, and our country is doing it in our name without our approval. Or how, (to paraphrase Chris Rock) since we invaded and occupied McDonald's we should be getting cheap hamburgers but instead the price of Big Macs went through the roof. Or how speculators and an unregulated market have driven us into long term recession. Or how the middle class has been plundered and the nation has been re-engineered into a plutocracy under their noses while they "vigilantly" sat in the watchtowers and supposedly kept the gate.

Wait, they didn't say any of that, did they.

They're late even acknowledging the water rose. We will have been way over our heads in the Big Muddy for a long time before they even say that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #77
284. Swift Boats, anyone?
A "real journalist" only tells us what other people think?

WOW!

THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THE PROBLEM IS.

Let's see, these guys over here say Kerry faked his wounds and lied on his Bronze Star application. I have tons of evidence that they're flat out wrong, but I'm a A REAL JOURNALIST so I won't report actual facts and evidence; I'll just tell you what these other people think.

Oh, did I mention that some people think Barack Obama is a muslim? And that Hillary Clinton murdered Vince Foster? And that Max Cleland is in bin Laden's back pocket?

What can I do? I'm just a "real journalist." If someone's saying it, I gotta pass it on, cause that's all I do. Don't ask me to spend 10 seconds on Google or search for some documentation or interview somebody who might actually have been there so that I can find out that what these people are saying is a complete fabrication, cause that's not what "real journalists" do.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HEyHEY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #77
320. Correct
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HEyHEY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #75
317. Thing is you people often don't want to hear it
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 01:11 PM by HEyHEY
If "the truth" doesn't line up with your personal political beliefs, you call the media liars and blah blah blah.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OutaTowner Donating Member (21 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #69
266. I'm merely playing devil's advocate here...Message:
...since I believe they should be doing "the right thing".

But, it is the ones that don't really care and are only in it for the pay check that make it up the corporate ladder. They wouldn't have the chance to make it there in the first place if they did "real journalism". While they real ones get cast aside long before they see the top, or probably are stuck gathering "the facts" and are never given any say in how those facts are reported.

It would take some huge push to get the MSM "back on track". Not saying we shouldn't strive for it, but the way MSM functions is fully established.


(looking back over my post, I apologize in advance for how many "quotation marks" I used, heh)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #63
120. How about the DCM? The Dominant Corporate Media?
NGU.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeffR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #48
57. The poster you're responding to used to be a journalist, ironically.
You do raise some good points, which I suspect she will agree with.

But the overweening issue here is (to me): Just how good a journalist was Russert? And for me, having grown up with Cronkite, Huntley, Brinkley, Moyers, Koppel, Rather and others, I have to say Russert wasn't really very good. Yes, he had his moments, and yes, he perfected Gotcha! journalism as we know it. What that really added to our communal understanding or the vitality of what passes for our national debate is questionable. I'm inclined to think it about zilch, myself. Your mileage may vary, of course.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progdonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #48
64. and you admit you have no fucking idea what happened on MTP...
"I never watched much of Tim Russert's show but I can bet there were some very informative moments in it."

Like the time when Cheney (who went on MTP because he knew he could "control the message" with Russert) planted a story in the NY Times about meetings between Iraq and al Qaeda in the lead up to the war, and then went on MTP and quoted the NY Times story as proof? And Russert just sat there, not having the slightest clue (or care) that he was being played?

Or how about when he said in an interview that his view of journalism is to always assume everything's off the record until the source explicitly states it's on the record--which is exactly 180 degrees from actual journalism.

Yes, there's "a hell of a lot of great journalism out there," but none of it was on Meet the Press with Tim Russert, which is the whole fucking point. :banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #64
67. That wasn't the point
The whole point was that the entire "MSM" is crap, which is patently false.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #67
119. And you can prove this, how? O'reilly called. He wants his loofa back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #119
128. Oh my god
do I really have to go and dig up some of the best journalism in the past year, which was published in the NY Times, the Wash. Post and elsewhere?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:47 AM
Response to Reply #128
137. Yep. O'reilly REALLY wants his loofa back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #67
263. It's true. Which of those who do "the job of journalism"
reported the facts regarding the attempted coup in Venezuela, after they first rushed to print the State Department's lies?

Which of these stalwart defenders of the truth pursued the story of why they were used to spread lies?

There are a *few* exceptions to the rule. They only prove the rule.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #64
74. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
progdonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #74
83. do you have any contrasting evidence?
Cherry picking is when you pick out a few examples that support your position when the majority of evidence contradicts it. Just because I give you only two examples doesn't mean it's cherry picking.

Those examples were representative of the whole, so they're perfectly valid--especially when they both go to the heart of Russert's view of journalism: complete credulity and caring more about being good friends and cocktail party pals with politicians instead of holding them accountable to the people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #83
89. So, how about when ...
Russert called out David Duke, on who the three largest employers were in Louisiana during his gubernatorial run? Or when he asked Cheney whether it was really necessary to go into Iraq in light of the fact the CIA had showed him evidence that there were no WMD's in Iraq, pre-invasion. Or when he entered the lion's den - the oval office - and asked Bush flat out whether the Iraq invasion was a war of choice or necessity, which made the buffoon stumble for words.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #89
106. "Or when he entered the lion's den - the oval office
- and asked Bush flat out whether the Iraq invasion was a war of choice or necessity..."

Are you just fucking stupid or what?

To question BushCo in 2004 AFTER the drumbeat to war in 2002 and the horror of Shock and Awe in 2003 wasn't much of a challenge and it was too fucking little, too fucking late.

The time to ask the hard questions, to challenge the "lion," to be a fucking REAL journalist is BEFORE going to war, before invading and destroying a sovereign nation and killing many innocents, before consuming our treasury on disastrous policy...



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progdonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:21 AM
Response to Reply #89
160. David Duke?
That's who you go for? OMG, Russert called out David fucking Duke... he must've had like such huge cajones to do that!

Here's a freebee: he famously destroyed Ross Perot on his show back during the 1992 election (or so I've been told--maybe that was bullshit too). Yes, he often presented very challenging questions to guests: those who were a threat to his corporate/Republican employers.

Re: your Cheney comment, so what if he asked Cheney that? He would also very often ask for someone's response to a difficult question, but he would not follow up. Cheney would just respond that he had other intelligence, or the CIA was wrong, and Russert would let it go, when the proper response is, "Stop lying to me or get the fuck off my show." Oftentimes, asking a challenging question but letting the bullshit response slide by unchallenged is worse than not asking in the first place, because you've created the image that the person did face a challenging question and gave such a stellar response that it required no follow up. I'll put it this way: Cheney loved going on Meet the Press, but he never once would face that great "journalist" Jon Stewart--the pathetic thing is, Stewart is a thousand times the journalist Russert ever was, and he's a fucking comedian.

And anyone can make Bush stumble for words just by asking him what the capital of the United States is, so that's hardly impressive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L0oniX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:48 PM
Response to Reply #48
85. "for very little pay" ??? Tim Russert was a millionaire
IMO you are most likely a freeper troll trying to stomp on Nancy who is one of the top quality posters on this board, and you are trying to disrupt this board. We know about the freeper plan.

I knew more about the WMD's than than Tim Russert, the corporate shill, and I knew what was really happening on the ground in Iraq because I was getting video and email from soldier friends of mine in Iraq before the lame ass military realized that the truth was getting out over the inet and cut it off. Get off the crack pipe!

evilfrown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #85
94. Um ... okay
you wouldn't understand the job Tim Russert had to do every week. That's part of the problem with most people who like to consider themselves "informed." Whether they recognize it or not, they are "informed" largely by journalists, who do the thankless work of dealing with politicians and the like on a daily basis and then get chastised for it by a public who always thinks they could have done a better job. I think you should start reading more, because there is a hell of a lot of great journalism out there, including outlets that you may consider main stream. I never watched much of Tim Russert's show but I can bet there were some very informative moments in it. Unfortunately for you and your like, they were totally missed. Maybe someday people will start realizing the value hardworking journalists do, day in and day out for very little pay, constant stress, and very little appreciation. Oh, and remember, the job of journalism is a fundamental aspect of democracy, so as long as you continue to denigrate it, you're simply contributing to the erosion of all the best values that this country was founded upon.

Yeah. sound like I must be a "freeper" because I disagree with "Nancy."

And you know, I've heard some pretty f&cked up stuff from friends who served in the Special Forces in Iraq, but I don't necessarily believe all that I hear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L0oniX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:07 AM
Response to Reply #94
99. Welcome to my ignore dungeon ...where 32 out of 68 have received the granite cookie.
I await your demise too. I don't read IMO disruptive freeper troll posts. Enjoy your stay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Major Hogwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #99
272. Cindy the witch will probably steal the recipe for that cookie, too.
Christ, she can't even use her own shovels to shovel shit with.
Why am I not surprised - because she's a McCain!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #99
308. LOonix, how can you search to find out who the newly departed are?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L0oniX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #308
401. I suppose there is more than one way to find out who has been TS'd.
I use my ignore list. Every 2 or 3 days I go thru the list and click on all the names to check for a TS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #401
406. thanks.
Edited on Wed Jun-18-08 12:21 AM by kath
don't have an Ignore list, but I have a very long Ignorant List. Man, if only one of them would start another Russert thread and bring all the emoters and holier-than thou ignorant types out of the woodwork, I could get that baby up to 200!
Or if another neocon enabler died... or a neocon himself...

(ooh, wait, don't think I've mined *this* thread yet)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #94
132. 'Journalist' Russert: "Integrity is for paupers!"
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 12:47 AM by ClassWarrior
Integrity is for paupers!

In 1992, shortly after being named moderator of Meet The Press, Tim Russert was having lunch with a broadcast executive. The mealtime conversation was about the pros and cons of working for General Electrics NBC subsidiary. Russert expounded on how being employed by GE had brought him to the realization that things functioned better when Republicans were in charge.

You know, Tim, you used to be such a rabid Democrat when you worked for Pat Moynihan, said the executive. But now that youve gotten a glimpse of whos handing out the money in this business, youve become quite the Jaycee. Were you wrong about everything you used to believe so strongly?

I still believe, Russert said, leaning across the table. I believe in everything I ever did. But I also know that I never would have become moderator on Meet The Press if my employers were uncomfortable with me. And, given the amount of money at stake, millions of dollars, I dont blame them. This is business.

The executive agreed. But are you concerned about losing yourself? You know, selling out?

Russert pounded the table. Integrity is for paupers!


http://makethemaccountable.com/podvin/media/020109_Russ...

(Thanks to TheBorealAvenger for the post idea.)

NGU.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XtraProudDem Donating Member (145 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #132
259. Yawn...
Here we go again with this fucking "quote."

I can't believe ANYONE thinks Russert was serious when he made that comment. Put it in context and really THINK about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #85
181. Tim Russert being greased with money makes it all the more understandable, though.
You joke about crack addiction, but really, is money easier to refuse? Doesn't it make sense that Tim Russert did what he was told, for money?

In my opinion, that doesn't make him a bad person. I would not be able to resist huge amounts of money, if I were told to lie to the camera to get that money. In my opinion, there are larger, more powerful demons who are writing the paychecks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #85
414. Please keep telling them gawd awful trolls the truth.
Maybe someday it will sink in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HCE SuiGeneris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #48
88. "You're not a journalist"...
and you have abdicated any credibility by making an unsubstantiated claim. Pompous, self-aggrandizing tirades do not earn one respect, nor believability.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #88
95. Exactly what's unsubstantiated in this post?
you wouldn't understand the job Tim Russert had to do every week. That's part of the problem with most people who like to consider themselves "informed." Whether they recognize it or not, they are "informed" largely by journalists, who do the thankless work of dealing with politicians and the like on a daily basis and then get chastised for it by a public who always thinks they could have done a better job. I think you should start reading more, because there is a hell of a lot of great journalism out there, including outlets that you may consider main stream. I never watched much of Tim Russert's show but I can bet there were some very informative moments in it. Unfortunately for you and your like, they were totally missed. Maybe someday people will start realizing the value hardworking journalists do, day in and day out for very little pay, constant stress, and very little appreciation. Oh, and remember, the job of journalism is a fundamental aspect of democracy, so as long as you continue to denigrate it, you're simply contributing to the erosion of all the best values that this country was founded upon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:02 AM
Response to Reply #48
92. 80 poster, you have come to the wrong
website and are seriously deluded about Russert.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #92
101. Oh
Wow, now aren't we an elitist?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:25 AM
Response to Reply #101
115. is that supposed to be an insult?
Well, in manner of your friends in the misadministration and its enablers in the M$M:

Who cares what you think or, to quote your obvious hero, So what.

You claim to know the hard work that Russert did yet you admit you didn't watch him that often. Hmmm, that's the same kind of twisted idiocy that comes from your buddies in the White House and on FOX.

Call me what you want but you're clearly no journalist if you think journalism is reporting what people think rather than the facts and truth...

Get thee to a freeepery, troll.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #115
126. You have 1000 plus posts
that must make you really really smart. Or maybe someone with too much time on their hands.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincenzoesq Donating Member (171 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:30 AM
Response to Reply #126
192. hey hurricaneric you seem uncomfortable
maybe try a glass of prune juice
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:55 AM
Response to Reply #48
199. Russert Wasn't a REAL Journalist
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 04:56 AM by fascisthunter
He was a coporate tool who helped sell a war that cost America. You call that journalism? I bet every neocon would too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:58 AM
Response to Reply #199
200. .
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 04:59 AM by fascisthunter
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:44 AM
Response to Reply #48
233. Thankless job?
That statement alone is insulting. These people are thanked to the tune of millions of dollars, multiple homes and private jets. You actually say 'ver little pay' about Russert who made millions a year and flew dozens of people into parties at his Nantucket mansion. Very little pay? These are rich men and women. Very little appreciation? Like being famous and every opinoion televized?
You post is filled with delusion. Journalism sould be one of the pillars of our Democracy, but folks like Russert failed that duty, time and time again. He denigrated it as do his fawning peers.
If that is a thankless job, please can I have a thankless job too? I love Nantucket and can barely afford the weekend there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #233
234. The fact that Russert made a
large amount of money, likely had to do with the fact that he ran the Washington Bureau of NBC as well as anchored MTP for 17 years. I said "very little pay" in regards to the majority of journalists these days who are either loosing their jobs, being given more and more work with fewer and fewer resources ect., which I can personally attest to.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #234
327. Projecting
Your place is very different from what Russert had. No offense, but your job and his are not the same in any way. You tried to use the hard times of actual reporters to defend this media sell out, by claiming folks like him don't get much money or credit. You called Russert's gig thankless. He made millions a year. Deal with it. Russert is till getting more thanks and praise in death than most deserving people do in life, like for example our troops, our teachers, our social workers.
One of the reasons there are no resourses for you is that folks like Timmy eat the whole pie. If he has to get millions, the rest must go with less, and that means reporters in the field are fired to pay for the fat cat. It is not personal to Tim at all. It is the corporate way.
The fact that he took excessive pay to the detriment of his department is why this is an important issue. Hmmm another few million for me or a staff of investigative reporters in the field....I say another few million for me!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #327
329. I agree with you there
My original gripe is with the notion that all the media ("MSM") is crap, which I totally disagree with. But hey maybe i'm biased due to the fact that I actually work in the media?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XtraProudDem Donating Member (145 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:07 AM
Response to Reply #48
249. Excellent post
Lot's of armchair media critics, judging a man's life work only by the missteps.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #48
257. The "job of journalism" (awkward...), IF it is to assist the public
in self-government, must be helpful.

Most of your colleagues in that profession are not being helpful, but rather assisting corporations and the government in their efforts to lie to the public.


"Maybe someday people will start realizing the value hardworking journalists do, day in and day out for very little pay, constant stress, and very little appreciation."

The value they do?

Really?

And you're a journalist?

:rofl:

Enjoy your stay, guy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #257
330. You can come up with a better criticism than that
can't you? The fact is that the more people deride the media en-masse, the more it will be eroded to a point where it will eventually be populated completely by bloviators such as O'Reilly or Olberman. There may be a place for those guys but I like the old journalism of stiving toward objectivity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #257
331. you would make a perect editor
the kind who forgot what being a reporter is actually like.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #48
415. You mention "little pay"
Edited on Wed Jun-18-08 05:33 PM by truedelphi
Yes, some journalists, like the ones that report for outlets like "The Coastal Post" get very little pay (If "no pay" can be considered a little pay)

BUt people like Tim Russert are millionaires. And if there is something that a M$M journalist doesn't like to deal with, he has staff that will do it for him.

Anyway I wish I could say a week from now I will have forgotten Russert.

But I will always remember him - for his statement "Integrity is for paupers."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:43 PM
Response to Original message
50. 9/11? Katrina? How about Iowa RIGHT FUCKING NOW?!
Why is that story running in second place?

Oh wait, you already answered that question. :argh:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #50
60. Iowa?
What is this place of which you speak? Why are these people important?

Don't you understand that "one of their own" has passed, and in a 24/7 news cycle, there is no time to be devoted to those in dire need, in dire circumstances?

Good God, where are your priorities?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
juno jones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:44 PM
Response to Original message
51. K&R! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:57 PM
Response to Original message
58. I have only a passing notion of who Tim Russert even WAS
considering that I have about as much use for the television "news" as a brickbat to cure my headache.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeffR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #58
61. Mythsaje!
How the hell are ya??

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #61
62. Fair to middlin'
:shrug:

I've certainly been better, but I've certainly been worse. Now that we're starting to see the sun up here in the Pacific NW, I'm seeing my health slowly improve with minor setbacks here and there. How have things been with you and yours?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeffR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #62
65. Hangin' in, insanely busy, which beats not being busy, of course.
Good to see you here!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #65
66. I know about busy.
Even on the days I'd rather just lay in bed, I have to get up to shuffle around the house, or drag my exhausted ass to work. Things that I used to do without even thinking about it just wears me out in no time flat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeffR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #66
68. Sorry to hear that.
But I hope your voice is prominent here this summer.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #68
71. Could be, now that the whole Primary thing is over.
I couldn't deal with all of that. Not with everything else on top of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HCE SuiGeneris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:30 PM
Response to Original message
76. Well said, Nance.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L0oniX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:38 PM
Response to Original message
80. My sentiments too and more...
<snip>"Some people here have a more balanced view on who's deaths should be considered, like all the innocent victims of the wars and the over 5000 children in our own country who die every year from neglect. While you all fawn over the death of a millionaire, other unknowns are dying and they deserve better."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

<snip>"massaging the dead for every drop of camera-time and pity/attention they can get"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
D23MIURG23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:40 PM
Response to Original message
81. Well Spoken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveT Donating Member (447 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:44 PM
Response to Original message
84. Nance, this was true and valuable.
I have to tell you that I am not your biggest fan. While I agree with almost everything you post, I have to be honest and say that I look at your work as an exercise of preaching to the choir, most of the time. Sometimes fun, but usually you are shooting fish in a barrel.

I continue to agree with you in this post, but this one takes a bold and controversial position within the community of DU that provides a unique insight.

Thank you, Nance. Great post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-16-08 11:48 PM
Response to Original message
86. K&R K&R K&R K&R K&R!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tblue37 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
97. K&R. Thanks for helping to counterbalance the hagiography. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lugnut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:07 AM
Response to Original message
98. He was certainly no Walter Cronkite.
Nor was he comparable to Murrow. Helen Thomas asks tougher questions than any other of today's "journalists".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HousePainter Donating Member (90 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:10 AM
Response to Original message
102. The Peanut Gallery speaks
The job that Tim Russert did was an admirable one.
I'm sorry if your idea of "journalism" stops at partisan advocacy .
If you were a regular viewer of Meet The Press you would have seen endless examples of Russert probing and forcing his guests to discuss and defend their stands, opinions and statements on important and difficult issues. He did so in a thoughtful, civil, logical way that rarely allowed his personal views to get in the way, trying his best to put the facts in front of his audience trusting them to form their own opinion. Try it sometime (for 17 years) and see how easy you find it.

He also ran the NBC Washington Bureau and brought to the air and promoted some of the best on-air talent in any news organization.
People who do (and did at his urging) report on the war casualties, 9/11 heroes, the scourge of poverty and homelessness etc.


And he did it while remaining an enthusiastic, warm personality who took the time to write about and speak publicly about the bedrock of American society, the hard working middle class. He was thrilled to find the identification so many people from so many different backgrounds had with his portrait of his father. It was an example of what another genuine soul calls " much more that we hold in common than what separates us." He celebrated that in an unpretentious way.

Not bad for a working-class kid from Buffalo.
I'll miss him and so will many other people who are honest enough to admit that in his place they couldn't do nearly as good much less better.

As for the armchair quarterbacks ........ I refer you to the large wooden sign that hung in Russert's office
"Thou Shalt Not Whine"

Get out there and show us how it should be done.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:32 AM
Response to Reply #102
194. The Peanut Gallery? Oh please. Your post came from PR at NBC
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 04:33 AM by Raster
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HousePainter Donating Member (90 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:52 AM
Response to Reply #194
235. No ,my post came from watching Russert
and listening to what he said and how he explained what he saw.
My only connection with NBC is as an audience member.

I think those who are blowing so hard and hot and slamming Russert's reputation should share their resumes with us.
Let's see what they've done, if anything,if ever,to bring substantive issues to the public arena.

You may not have agreed with how he did it,but he did it.

What have you done ?






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #102
264. "endless examples of Russert probing and forcing his guests to discuss and defend their stands"
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 09:35 AM by redqueen
BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZT.



Enjoy your stay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HousePainter Donating Member (90 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 07:28 AM
Response to Reply #264
411. Gee ! how clever and substantive
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #411
412. WE actually paid attention to his interviews.
Enjoy your stay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HousePainter Donating Member (90 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #412
416. Gee another winner.
The implication being that I didn't or couldn't have or I wouldn't feel the way that I do,
and that Keith Olbermann, Barack Obama, Rachel Maddow and Bruce Springsteen also apparently feel.

But I guess they're all sell-outs too or didn't pay attention to his interviews either.

I'd love to watch some of the interviews you've done or read some of the substantive political analysis you've done to see how it should be done. Any links?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:12 AM
Response to Original message
103. Excellently put them in their place, their graves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nam78_two Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:16 AM
Response to Original message
107. K&R
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SwiperFox Donating Member (55 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:17 AM
Response to Original message
108. Right on!
Beautiful, OP, agree with you 100%.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:19 AM
Response to Original message
110. Exactly. He got all his glory already, with his milliom $ salary and Media Darling status
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #110
114. Propaganda message, saying nothing that isn't approved.. Glad to see others of like mind
for I felt insulted by all the media darling hype as if we had lost someone great rather than someone common who represented what was wrong with modern reporting and journalism in their privatized bubble of infotainment. Great post...truth rings loud here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:21 AM
Response to Original message
111. K&R
Good one! :applause:

Tim Russert was a skillful actor, but he was not the nice guy he played on TV. In the BBC documentary "Digging the Dirt" they show Russert calling the RNC oppo group to see what "Gore is a liar" smears they had for him to use on Al Gore in the run up to the 2000 election---what kind of journalistic integrity is that? Margaret Carlson said that Russert acted like "a prosecutor" when he had Gore in Meet the Press in 2000. He accused Gore of committing perjury, said the FBI's Louis Freeh wanted a special prosecutor to investigate him for possible criminal charges---it was a lie. That was Russert's specialty. Telling lies on TV that his guests could not refute because they were on camera and could not look them up. He lied about WMDs in the run up to the invasion of Iraq. He lied about the Clinton libraries in the debate and was caught by the press. He let Cheney sit on his show and tell the world that Iraq was behind 9/11 which everyone knew was a lie but he did not challenge him, and then he had the nerve to accuse Obama of being associated with Louis Farrakhan when everyone knew that Obama was not associated with Farrakhan. Along with Tom Brokaw, Brian Williams and Chris Matthews and David Gregory he was one of "corporate players" at General Electric who could be counted upon to do the parent company's business. I have links for all of this if anyone needs them.

He may have been a great guy in real life, but plenty of people can be "nice" and still do work that would not make the Founders of this country proud.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
springhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #111
141. The Daily Howler and Russert..............
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh110207.shtml

With that in mind, we ask you a question: Do liberals and Democrats understand, even now, that Tim Russert and the rest of the NBC gang have played a key role in this process? (We speak now of the most famous Lost BoysRussert, Williams and Matthews.) As you may recall, this team was assembled by Jack Welch, a near-billionaire conservative Republican who was also numbered among the nations largest defense contractors. Over the course of the past dozen years, they have become exceptionally richand they have trashed both Clintons and Gore in ways that are truly extraordinary. Each of the three embarrassed himself in Campaign 2000, for example. And yet, the career liberal world has basically refused to discuss this, right up this present day.

Any chance that the career liberal world covets those prime spots on Hardball?

Below, were going to continue to discuss Tuesday nights Democratic debate. In particular, were going to look at the questions posed by those multimillionaire Reagan Democrats, Russert and Williams. But with regard to Brother Russert, a question has finally arisen this week. Do liberals see a partisan animus in his long-term conduct? Do we liberals see itor not? This question arises because of this piece by Paul Waldman, at the American Prospect.

Waldman often does good work. (On another day, wed say he does great work. But today cant be that day.) But his current piece, about Tim Russert, defines our current problem.

Lets start with the perpetual analytical problem; most of what Waldman says here is accurate. And a number of liberals have rushed to say that this is a brilliant piece. But read through Waldmans profile of Russert, and you will note a curious omission: Not a single word in the piece contemplates any partisan aspect to Russerts ongoing performance. To Waldman, Russert is a big, phony dopea big, stupid guy who asks dumb questions. But ask the same questions of everyone? In Waldmans profile, there isnt any sign that Russerts conduct might betray a partisan animus.

Early on, for example, Waldman describes Russerts dopy question about Bible verses at last months Democratic debate. This follows:
WALDMAN (10/31/07): When Obama finished his answer, Russert said to the other candidates, "I want to give everyone a chance in this. You just take 10 seconds." Predictable banality ensued. A foreign visitor unfamiliar with our presidential campaigns might have scratched her head and said, "This is how you decide who will lead your country?"

Indeed it is, because the process is controlled by Tim Russert and people like him. Russert's Bible question encapsulates everything wrong with him, and with our political coverage more generally. It seeks to make candidates look bad rather than finding out something important about them (if you want to explore a candidate's religious beliefs, you don't do it in pop-quiz form and give them just ten seconds to answer). It substitutes the personal anecdote for the policy position, the sound-bite for the substantive answer. It distills the debate into a series of allegedly symbolic, supposedly meaningful moments that can be replayed.

This type of debate question is not about what the candidate believes and would actually do in office, but about how clever the moderator is for cornering the candidate. And above all, it takes a genuinely relevant matter (a candidate's view of the universe) and crams it through a channel by which the thoughtful candidate will be pilloried and the shallow, pandering, overly rehearsed candidate will garner praise.
Banality is surely a problem with Russert, as with Welchs Lost Boys as a group. But is Russert even-handed as he dishes his treatments? There isnt a word in Waldmans piece to suggest that he may not be. According to Waldman, Russert asks the type of debate question which seeks to make candidates look bad rather than finding out something important about them. But over the years, has this conduct been even-handed? Waldmans failure as a liberal is obvious here. It isnt just that he doesnt say that Russert tilts the field against Dems. In this piece, he doesnt even consider this as a possibility.

This omission is quite striking in light of this weeks events. On Tuesday night, Russert and Williams staged a public auto-da-fe the likes of which weve never seen. But then, no one else has seen such a thing either; simply put, there has never been a presidential debate like the one the two high peacocks staged. And lets get real here: For anyone who has followed their work, it is impossible to imagine the pair doing such things to a leading Republican. And yet, many career players on the liberal web still cant bring themselves to advance the thought that the two big guns who were hired by Welch may have some sort of partisan animus. The thought doesnt enter Waldmans headand heres Matt Yglesias complete review of Waldmans profile:
YGLESIAS: Paul Waldmans brilliant piece on the evils of Tim Russert as debate moderator (and, of course, as Meet the Press host) unfortunately only scratches the surface of our problem, which is not so much Russert as it is Russertism. This, in turn, is built into the deeper structure of these things. The trouble is that someone discovered one day that Meet the Press or a primary debate could be very important even if almost nobody watched. The reason is that a clip might get picked up by shows that people do watch.

Under this new dynamic, the role of the moderator is not to play host to an interesting informative discussion but rather to maximize the odds that some particular 10-second snippet of an hour-long broadcast will be worthy of rebroadcast. Hence, the focus on inane questions designed less to draw out an illuminating remark than to trip someone up. The trouble, though, is that the more a broadcast is structured like this the fewer people will watch. Russertism has succeeded in creating a kind of political broadcast that even hard-core political junkies find difficult to watch. Indeed, the only way to make it tolerable is to step back and go meta, scanning the broadcast for signs of those telltale clips.

But the fewer people watch, the more the debate becomes about clip-generation rather than debate. And that only makes the debate more unwatchable! And down and down we go.

UPDATE: To be clear, it's not even necessarily that I think a "wonkier" broadcast would attract higher ratings than the current sort of debates. Rather, I think that if they tried to produce an hour-long debate broadcast whose goal was to maximize viewership of the hour-long broadcast, rather than producing two-hour broadcasts whose goal is to maximize the odds of generating a signature "moment," that the broadcasts would get higher viewership. It shouldn't be that hard to produce a presidential debate that virtually every political junkie watches. Right now what they're doing doesn't even attract that audience.
For starters, we think you know the first rule of this game: Ill tell the rubes that youre brilliant this week; you can say the same about me sometime later. But even after the past fifteen years, it doesnt seem to cross Matts mind that part of the problem with Russertism may be its partisan cast. In the minds of these fiery liberals, Russert's inane questions are apparently equally doled. Russert tries to trip up Dems. But to judge from their work, he apparently tries to trip up Republicans too.

In Matts piece, Russert tries to trip someone up. We arent told who it is.

Chronology makes Matts post remarkable. It follows, by only two days, one of the most remarkable presidential debates in our history. No candidate has ever been savaged by moderators as Clinton was savaged on Tuesday (details below); nothing even remotely resembling that debate has ever been staged. But as they think about the guy who staged it, Waldman and Yglesias dont even raise the question of partisan animus. If youre a liberal, and you read their work, you arent told this might be a question.

In our view, Russert, Matthews and Williams have long been a partisan wrecking crew. Their debates have been astounding all year long; we have gone to substantial length to examine the way they have shaped them. Beyond that, Russerts problems were quite apparent in Campaign 2000the Event That Must Never Be Discussedand Matthews was simply astounding. For ourselves, we cant begin to understand what keeps liberal writers from noticing this. But its astounding to see the way they have to be pushed, dragged and hauled toward the task of observing whats real.

Time passes slowly up here in the mountains! Eight years after the trashing of Gore, some of us have managed to say that what happened may not have been kosher. (Apparent rule: Once you win the Nobel Peace Prize, career liberal writers will start to defend you!) But even now, these writers cant see the partisan problems displayed by Jack Welchs sick network. Lets say it again: This group was hand-picked by a powerful conservative Republican, then turned loose to savage the Clintons and Gore. But so what? Even after Tuesdays astonishment, the liberal world still cant digest it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:23 AM
Response to Original message
113. Nance - The best summation of what I felt and couldn't
articulate.

K and R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arikara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:15 AM
Response to Original message
155. (real) JOURNALISTS KILLED ON DUTY: 129* (in Iraq)
Here is a statistical analysis of journalists killed in Iraq since hostilities began in March 2003, as compiled by the Committee to Protect Journalists. CPJ considers a journalist to be killed on duty if the person died as a result of a hostile actionsuch as reprisal for his or her work, or crossfire while carrying out a dangerous assignment. CPJ does not include journalists killed in accidents, such as car or plane crashes, unless the crash was caused by aggressive human action (for example, if a plane were shot down or a car crashed trying to avoid gunfire). Nor does CPJ include journalists who died of health ailments. Capsule reports detailing each death are available by following the links below.

* In addition, CPJ keeps a separate tally of media support workers who have been killed. That number stands at 50.

By Year:
2008: 4
2007: 32
2006: 32
2005: 23
2004: 24
2003: 14

By Nationality:
Iraqi: 107
European: 13
Other Arab countries: 3
United States: 2
All other countries: 5
Note: One journalist had dual Iraqi-Swedish citizenship and is listed in each nationality.

By Gender:
Men: 118
Women: 11

By Circumstance:
Murder: 85
Crossfire or other acts of war: 44

more>>> http://www.cpj.org/Briefings/Iraq/Iraq_danger.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crickets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:22 AM
Response to Original message
161. Recommended
Thank you, Nance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neuvocat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:29 AM
Response to Original message
169. What about the journalists who died in combat?
Nary a peep for anyone who died alongside the troops, let alone of course the troops and civillian casualties.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Reterr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 02:36 AM
Response to Original message
187. Exactly right-recommended.eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cboy4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 02:54 AM
Response to Original message
189. Groan.
Too bad there's not a seven day cooling off period when it comes to grave dancing at DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:29 AM
Response to Reply #189
191. Name one thing about grave dancing in the original post. Please. You tell me, what is or are
the offensive parts? Don't hold back, help me to understand. What specifically in Nance's post said something to the effect of "malicious fucking glee at the death of Tim Russert." After all, that is the approximate definition du jour of "grave dancing" today, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cboy4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:40 AM
Response to Reply #191
195. This part:
"The MSM coverage of Tim Russerts passing, and the idea that we should all indulge the incessant ramblings of his colleagues because they are hurting, is offensive to me on every level imaginable."

First of all, there's the insinuation that his colleagues are not really hurting, because "hurting" was in quotation marks.

That's just unnecessary.

It's a very clever way to disguise one's grave dancing in my opinion.

And you're one of the suckers who's apparently bought it, hook, line and sinker.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:48 AM
Response to Reply #195
198. Don't even. I didn't have to buy. It was shoved down my throat.
Sorry, never looked good in sack cloth and ashes. What you are seeing is not grave dancing. It's frustration, it's anger. It's gallows humor. But no, it wasn't in the OP. I see we have a difference of "opinion." That's in quotes also.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cboy4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 05:49 AM
Response to Reply #198
208. It's grave dancing disguised by what you call frustration and
anger.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 05:06 AM
Response to Reply #189
202. What's even worse is your complaining about said Grave Dancing
And your indescribably grating inability to distinguish that which could be classified as such, and that which is not, will probably drone on much longer after even the hint of alleged grave dancing has hushed to nothing more than a distant memory.

This Post isn't grave dancing. And sadly, the very relevant and rather strong points that were made were completely missed by you.

Give it a Rest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cboy4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 05:45 AM
Response to Reply #202
207. I realize the OP Is the official spokeswoman for you and
a lot of others here at DU .. most notably during the primary.

It would be wildly refreshing to hear you perhaps think for yourself, rather than cheer on your leader.

Talk about giving it a rest.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #207
333. Oh, please, would you stop with the pathetic ninnying.
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 01:51 PM by TheWatcher
I'm not cheerleading anyone, merely calling you on your usual annoying, grating bullshit.

But hey, if you want to go there, I think anyone can look back at the posting history of both you, and the OP, and "think for themselves", as far as making an accurate assessment of who has contributed more useful, relevant, and poignant content to this Site.

It's not even a contest.

*Pats you on the head*

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cboy4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #333
385. Mmmmm Hmmmm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jennied Donating Member (547 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:42 AM
Response to Original message
196. I wish I could rec this thread a million times!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #196
369. recommend --- there's one for you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 05:00 AM
Response to Original message
201. Another Great Post... Like a Fog Cutter
Cutting through the corporate BS being shoveled on DU. Thank you Nance for keeping it real.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 05:18 AM
Response to Original message
204. Yes! Spot on. ...
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 05:19 AM by ShortnFiery
"Rest in peace, Tim Russert. And rest in peace, MSM journalism - which, unfortunately, pre-deceased you years ago. I only wish you and your colleagues had bothered to notice its failing health, and stepped in to save it before its untimely death."

It has been noted that "The death of one celebrity is 'a tragedy' while the notation of the deaths of thousands of innocents is but merely 'a statistic.'"

Nothing drives that home to me more than having to "STOP" M$M news coverage for going close to a week now ... all in order to anoint a journalist who got it WRONG in Iraq ... as A Journalistic Saint. :eyes:

Go figure? = America: Where getting it WRONG is RIGHT. :(

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jeanette in FL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 05:33 AM
Response to Original message
206. Excellent read, Nance
You hit the ball out of the park and captured exactly what so many of us here felt, eloquently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anitar1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 05:52 AM
Response to Original message
209. Best post ever, Nance. Thank You n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mirrera Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 06:24 AM
Response to Original message
211. BINGO!!!! K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rasputin1952 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 06:35 AM
Response to Original message
213. I am reminded of the few Journalists that have made a mark...
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 06:56 AM by rasputin1952
for good or ill over the years, here are just a few.

During the Battle Of Britain, Americans received live reports from the rooftops of a besieged London. In the darkness, never knowing where the next bomb might fall, Edward R Murrow described the carnage.

On live TV, Walter Cronkite, removing his glasses, looking at the clock and telling the nation that JFK had died in Dallas.

Bernard Shaw, standing in front of a window describing the bombing of Baghdad....while Wolf Blitzer hid under a table.

Walter Cronkite, once again, in Viet Nam, telling the nation that the war was essentially lost.

These are but a few of a long line of true Journalists, replaced by overpaid talking heads, portrayer's of fear, harbingers of gloom and doom....waiting for that video of the person about to drown in a flash flood; a mother, a father, a child...we watch in silent horror as a life passes before our eyes.

Molly Ivins was a Journalist...E.D. Hill is a buffoon, and there lies the crux of the situation,



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 06:39 AM
Response to Original message
214. Dear MSM:
As you lazily fill hours of airtime with file tape honoring a "real journalist," do you see the irony in it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clear Blue Sky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 06:42 AM
Response to Original message
215. Great post!
The MSM is about agenda journalism, not reporting the news. And certainly not reporting good news or inspiring stories.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democrank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 06:50 AM
Response to Original message
216. Thank you, NG.
MSM`s lavish coverage of Tim Russert`s death is one of the most disrespectful spectacles I`ve ever observed.
Email your praises here...
Send your money to these two charities...
Look at this photo of Tim`s grieving son
Here is his Meet the Press chair
Listen to this replay of Tim`s son on the Today Show

I`m not "pissing" on anyone`s grave, I`m simply sickened to think that journalism/reporting has been cheapened to this extent. What`s next, an NBC prime time Russert memorabilia raffle? Seventeen more NBC anchorperson Russert books?

Tim Russert was an NBC teevee star. That means he gets wall-to-wall coverage that drowns out dead soldiers, missing children, flooded communities, homeless families? Good grief! What have we become?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acetylyne Donating Member (23 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 06:57 AM
Response to Original message
217. amen to that
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bread_and_roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:00 AM
Response to Original message
218. Right on target.
I never watched TR. I havn't watched the coverage - I rarely watch news and never the talking heads on TV. But reading about it here, I find it unbelievable that there seems to be days and days of it, and even more unbelievable that people evidently don't think that is insane. Has the rest of the world come to a stop? Are we supposed to be engaged in days and days of collective grief? Have we entered an alternate universe where our Caesar or Pharoh has died? Next we'll see paid mourners rending their garmets and clawing at their faces.

Let's see days and days of coverage of the Iraq dead - lets see days and days of footage and photos of the dismembered and incinerated children, let's see days and days of the orphaned children, the children drinking wormy water, the newborns I'm reading about being born in Fallujah with severe birth defects, the chidren in hospitals with no medicine - all that we have wrought, all that the MSM helped sell, that we never see.

I find it grimly hilarious how many scolds are piously proclaiming we should "respect" the dead - as if death wiped the slate clean. As you so pointedly make clear, we are very selective in which deaths we "respect." Another K&R here.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:02 AM
Response to Original message
219. Watch Orwell Rolls In His Grave
Orwell Rolls in His Grave - "Could a media system, controlled by a few global corporations with the ability to overwhelm all competing voices, be able to turn lies into truth?..." This chilling documentary film examines the relationship between the media, corporate America, and government. In a country where the "top 1% control 90% of the wealth", the film argues that the media system is nothing but a "subsidiary of corporate America." Director: Robert Kane Pappas - Run Time 1 Hour 46
{W/Mark Crispin Miller, Charles Lewis, Mike Moore}

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=192511476951589...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vilis Veritas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #219
286. I hope more people watch this video. PLEASE.
This is the most important story in America today.

Thank you EIL...

saddlesore
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #286
399. THIS should be a separate thread --- we need a SERIOUS campaign here at DU
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 09:37 PM by defendandprotect
to inform about what monopoly "media" actually means in wiping out a "free press" ...
which is, needless to say, long gone ---

I'm having a bit of trouble with the video -- but the sound is fine --

Thank you!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Highway61 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:13 AM
Response to Original message
223. October 2007
Presidential debate...question to Dennis

RUSSERT: Shirley MacLaine writes in her new book that you sighted a UFO over her home in Washington state, that you found the encounter extremely moving, that it was a triangular craft, silent and hovering, that you felt a connection to your heart and heard directions in your mind. Now, did you see a UFO?

THAT question speaks for itself....thanks Nance...good post
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HamdenRice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:24 AM
Response to Original message
224. One of your best ever!
The mourning self indulgence of these chattering propogandists disgusts me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pwb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:30 AM
Response to Original message
226. MSM ? Nothing but disinformation and delusions.
For instance when gas prices went up in the past, the news would fly over storage tanks to verify their capacity. They would fly out and see how many fully laden tankers were awaiting to be emptied.

Today they call Exxon mobile and ask them what is your capacity? Answer, Oh! our stocks are low we can not keep up with demand. That is what they will report even if the storage tanks are full.

There is no follow up.

I agree Nance, MSM is like A.M. radio, poor quality and a weak signal. Its time has passed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
4_TN_TITANS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:40 AM
Response to Original message
230. Another Nance grand slam....
as usual, perfect perspective. They can pretend, but there's no honor among the thieves who stole true journalism from Americans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sagetea Donating Member (471 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:41 AM
Response to Original message
231. Bravo
Nance!!! Once again you have perfect timing, content, and context!!!
It was one of your "rants" that brought me out of a three year lurk almost a year ago. I just love the way you write, Thank You Nance, for being so eloquent and clear with your words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
psychmommy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:22 AM
Response to Original message
236. wow nance, i totally agree
rip msm journalism. they could revive it if they wanted to. but, they'd rather sink to fox news level then to strive for excellence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
al bupp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:41 AM
Response to Original message
237. Nail, meet head. /nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K Gardner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:53 AM
Response to Original message
239. Out of the park perfect.. reasoned, well-stated and respectful all at once. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:55 AM
Response to Original message
241. Damn. These rants get better and better as the day goes by.
I often wonder if the journalists who scold us because we're being so mean to their good friend who has passed, really believe they have the power to control how we should think and how we should feel, when we know too well all the stories they've missed reporting which could have impacted on all our lives positively, and might have gained them the hero worship status they now expect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:56 AM
Response to Original message
243. THIS is the NanceGreggs I used to know and love.
Pre-Primary Nance meet Post-Primary Nance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swagman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:03 AM
Response to Original message
247. spot on ! please read 'Flat Earth News' by Nick Davies..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoFederales Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:09 AM
Response to Original message
250. Thank you. nt
NoFederales
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FutureDemocrat Donating Member (41 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:11 AM
Response to Original message
251. What about those of us DUers that are mourning? Can't you respect our feelings?
I cried when I found out. If you ever watched him, he is not a typical MSM guy.

For me, this isn't about the MSM. It isn't about his colleagues. It isn't about the need for people like you to constantly hate the MSM because you think people should only report what YOU want them to.

For me, I lost the ONLY MSM journalist that I trusted and respected. There are many in the public who are mourning him--not just his colleauges. I have been very saddened by the way my fellow democrats have been acting about this on here. I can only imagine how tasteless and heartless you people will act when Cheney and Bush pass on.

I thought we were supposed to be the party of compassion. I have learned many lessons about my own party these last few days. I am eve beginning to question if I really belong here with you people.

This website used to give me comfort. I have found no comfort here since the primaries began, and especially now during this sad loss. I wish you all to be ashamed for making our mourning worse, but I know you heartless jerks don't give a shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trumad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #251
368. Ugg...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #251
375. Please point out to me where ...
... in my OP or elsewhere, I have disrespected any DUer's right to mourn?

As for my "hate" towards the MSM, it has nothing to do with wanting them to report what I want them to - or whatever anyone else "wants" them to.

It has to do with doing their jobs, which means reporting the facts, not opinion; it's about covering Bush's illegal wiretapping schemes instead of the latest missing blonde teenager; it's about cheerleading the lead-up to war in Iraq without asking a single question as to the basis for doing so; it's about ignoring the health care crisis that millions of uninsured Americans are dealing with instead of 27/7 coverage of Terri Schiavo.

And if you're expecting to see a lot of compassion on this site when Bush and Cheney finally go off to their final "reward", you are on the wrong website.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
252. I sure hope "KO" is reading this one!
:applause:

Last night some airhead Referred to Tim as a "Great Leader" during the coverage of Al Gore's endorsement on MSNBC.

Is this too strong a reaction? :puke:

Am I a bad liberal now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pooka Fey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
255. Thank you, NanceGreggs. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auggie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:24 AM
Response to Original message
258. Kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OwnedByFerrets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:25 AM
Response to Original message
260. K and R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
npincus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
261. Bingo, Nance.
I feel genuinely saddened by Russert's death- what a shock. Tributes and praise were in order, but the sheer magnititude of coverage; the blanketing of MSNBC with Russert tributes, and black-out of any and all NEWS.... how truly revealing. All my suspicions have been validated; the MSM is just one big back-slapping social club with utter contempt for their audience... how relevant can we be? Their grief on losing a beloved colleague mattered more than doing their "job". I have no idea how many American soldiers died in Iraq since Firday afternoon. Unlike sudden heart attack, these deaths of HEALTHY young Americans in their prime who meant as much to their Moms and Dads as Russert meant to his family, were preventable.

The fact NBC talking heads professed to be so rudderless without Ruseert, the person who provided the "narrative" of the day, shows the complete degradation of our televised Fourth Estate... as wonderful a manager and human being he may have been, the news is not be a cullt of personality. How sad for America... how sad for Americans who have no access to alternative media sources. What a disgrace.

As always, you said it best.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:28 AM
Response to Original message
262. Good piece, Nance. I don't agree with all of it, but I have a question:
Is it really possible to carpet over the top of a dog? I'm serious. I really don't like my other half's dog, and I'm looking for options.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wowimthere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:35 AM
Response to Original message
265. K&R you are spot on
While I respect Russert as a man, I question his methods for getting at the truth. He was trying to be fair and balanced but truth is not fair or balanced... it is simply truth, unvarnished, un-pretty. A lie doesn't need equal time. And not asking questions of the administration during the run up to the war makes you derelict in your responsibility to serve the American people. To the degree Russert was involved with this administration is unknown. I say this though... to get involved with unscrupulous characters in the Plame affair was further proof that media was in bed with warmongers and yes... perhaps some were loving it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:37 AM
Response to Original message
267. Well said. K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Blue Flower Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
268. My thoughts exactly
Perfectly expressed. Thank you. Do they even understand that their sense of loss doesn't even come close to the loss of a single family that has lost a loved one due to the criminal activity of our government? Activity that Russert et al. could have prevented by pursuing the truth instead of trying to maintain their place in the Washington establishment?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BonnieJW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
269. I sadly agree.
Comparing this administration's unbelievable crimes to Watergate and the persistence of Woodward and Bernstein to uncover the truth is so completely different. I lived through Watergate and the press was unrelenting. They didn't let a single comment or statement go unprinted or unexamined. Watching all the criminals in the Nixon administration running for cover was like watching cockroaches after the light is turned on.

The press became LAZY. They just lap up whatever is fed to them and accept it. Whenever I see one of those dinners where the press socializes with the politicians, it reminds me that the free press is truly dead, as Nance artfully describes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:50 AM
Response to Original message
270. In an earlier day...
Russert's collegues would have simply gathered at a favored bar and hoisted shots and mugs while telling their "Tim stories" to the only audience to which they would have mattered: each other. And probably a few columns, sharing some of this with the wider world.

Not page 1, not the wall-to-wall coverage worthy of a fallen head of state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frank Lemadeer Donating Member (30 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #270
322. So true
They would have focused on continuing their job--finding and reporting the news.

They don't even realize how over the top they've taken this thing. They became enmeshed with government and now view themselves as the celebrity wing of it.

This is a great thread. I wish I had enough posts to qualify to add my recommend to it. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CrispyQ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
276. Thank you for saying so well what I have been feeling for the past few days.
:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Overseas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
280. THANK YOU for expressing our outrage so well.
I think the comparison with how much TV time has been devoted to our soldiers killed in Iraq is a good one. How compliant the TV media have been with the Bush-Cheney news management systems has been appalling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barbtries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
282. you are just
SO Friggin' right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Z_I_Peevey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
287. Recommendation #199. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vanboggie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:07 AM
Response to Original message
289. K&R #200
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 11:09 AM by vanboggie
Thank Goodness, Nance. There's been very little sanity on DU about the Russert-adoration fest. You'd think the guy was St. Ronnie or something
:sarcasm:

It's been terrible keeping my real feelings about Timmy to myself. It is difficult enough trying to keep my mouth shut on DU about Pelosi and her damning impeachment's off-the-table stance.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Indenturedebtor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
291. That is what's been bugging me the last few days.
Thanks for putting it so eloquently and succinctly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:11 AM
Response to Original message
292. Bless you!
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
natrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
293. some 58 year old dude has a heart attack, big deal
at least half a million people dead because of shitty republicans / dlc and a whole industry of these fake journalists
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
294. All good citizens should love and adore our friends on the telescreen!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibDemAlways Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
295. Nance, there are undoubtedly millions of
Americans who've never even heard of Tim Russert. People in this country who pay attention to politics and political talk shows are in the minority. While DUers get worked up arguing about how much coverage is too much, the average guy goes about his life unaware and uninterested.

I'm not much of a Jay Leno fan, but I find his Jaywalking segments eye-opening. He'll ask somebody to identify a picture of Cheney and be met with a blank stare. People have no idea who the vice president is, much less the damage he's done. I'd be willing to bet the average guy on the street could not ID Russert either if shown a photo.

TV journalism does, indeed, suck, but it's a reflection of an out of touch, lazy citizenry that doesn't care enough to demand journalistic integrity or attention paid to issues that matter and an insular bunch of media whores who see their function not as reporters of the news but determiners of what the news will be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sazemisery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
296. Thanks for verbalizing everything I've been thinking. K&R

4101

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Finite Donating Member (98 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:18 AM
Response to Original message
297. You do realise..
That all the Freepers complain about the 'liberal media' non-stop? If this carries on then all that will be left is openly biased stations like Fox.

I agree, the MSM isn't perfect, by a long shot, but it's preferable to polemics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
me b zola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
299. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arugula Latte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:35 AM
Response to Original message
301. A-freakin-men, Nance.
I'm amazed at how many of our fellow DUers believe that death automatically confers sainthood on someone. Yes, someone could have been a good husband, father and friend while simultaneously cheerfully carrying water for the most evil cabal to ever get its slimy tentacles on our nation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sybylla Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
302. Now that's what I call a rant.
You've said just about everything that's come to mind as I'm yelling at the TV over the grief-gasm. As always, you've said it so much better than I could.

Well done, Nance! As always. :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoldenOldie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #302
305. Thanks Nance
You may not be a journalist, but you do have a way with words which clarifies my thoughts.

I have been watching Meet the Press almost since it's beginning in November 1947. It was part of family-time to sit in front of the bulging-eye, watching and listening to "Journalists," Martha Rountree, Roger Mudd, Marvin Kalb, etc. Tim Russert was a personality, but never a "Journalist," and never, ever, moderated the program with the depth and insight as those previous Journalists. Tim Russert, the "Lawyer," didn't even use the skills of an attorney in questioning his guests.

With all the 24/7 Tim Russert, memorial, I was waiting for an announcement of the viewing within The Capitol Rotunda to include the changing of the guard???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
literacyadvocate Donating Member (58 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:54 AM
Response to Original message
303. Hit the MSM nail on the head! Kudos to you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:12 PM
Response to Original message
307. Well, yes.
It's astonishing that this even has to be said, but apparently it does have to be said.

I stopped watching TV during the run-up to the 2004 election. Russert and the others offended me then, and I have no reason to believe that the so-called "news media" has improved at all.

Meanwhile, our troops are being killed and maimed, they're losing their minds because of the horrific things they're being ordered to do and witness. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people are dead. The world will never be the same, and the MSM plays on...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
311. Good work Nance.
I remember '88, and that's all I'm going to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
prairierose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
312. Thanks Nance...
clear and concise as straight to the point. I value your writing on this site. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
323. I agree. I stopped watching after the supreme court
choose bush. I believe they said that it would hurt bush psychologically to take away the presidency that he "bush" believed was given to him initially . Remember this is a paraphrase, but I can bet it is close to the nonsensical excuse that was used to stop the re-count. Anyways, I could not watch Tim Russet or others after that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HEyHEY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
324. Blah, blah
Complain all you want. Fact is, there's some good reporters out there in the MSM. As for the ambulance chasing crap... blame society for how it answers at focus groups.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pacalo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
326. This should be sent to Keith Olbermann, titled "The Viewers' Special Comment".
I think you speak eloquently for all of us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
varelse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
328. Thank you
it needed to be said, and you said it perfectly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
336. I agree...

not only is Russert being canonized, but because of the faux war between MSNBC and Faux News, he is also being painted as a liberal commentator. TV journalism has most definitely shifted right and is highly filtered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nightjock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 01:57 PM
Response to Original message
337. You are amazing
I wish I could recommend this 1,000 times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hurricaneric Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 02:16 PM
Response to Original message
340. Keith Olberman called Tim Russert
a Partisan for the Truth. I like that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DWilliamsamh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
343. Thanks Nance for striking the balance.
Once again you have managed to strike the balance between two truths:

1) Tim Russert the human being deserves whatever love and morning he earned from his family and friends as they go through their personal grief and from what I have heard he does seem to have been a wonderful human being on a personal and family level. May he rest in peace.

2) Tim Russert was not the dean of television journalism, in the mold of Edward R. Murrow, or Walter Cronkite, or Harry Reasoner or David Brinkley. He was the dean of modern TeeVee Journalism. Unfortunately none of his contemporaries seems to know there is a HUGE difference between what Tim did professionally, and what they do professionally, and what real journalists do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 02:53 PM
Response to Original message
346. Those people are merely citizens . . . Russert was a CELEBRITY . . . !!!
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 02:54 PM by defendandprotect
Make way for celebrity --- !!!

Thank you!! Well done!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
colsohlibgal Donating Member (670 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
350. On The Mark
Tim Russert by all accounts was a good guy, an admirable family man, and was well liked; and on a personal level it was tragic that he died prematurely. It is an incredibly sad event, I wish it hadn't happened, and I feel for his family and friends.

However, in the run up to the war and for a good time after he consistently lobbed softball after softball to the likes of Cheney and others. He was not one of those speaking truth to power when that was not popular, so he was as big an enabler for the Bush cartel as anyone in the MSM, considering his high profile status.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
concerned canadian Donating Member (243 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
352. K&R

Ah, the voice of sanity! As usual, much appreciated
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Plucketeer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
354. On the money.
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 03:37 PM by Plucketeer
Tim wasn't anywhere NEAR the league of REAL journalists. Tim was basically an entertainer. On sunday mornings I was more inclined to have Tim in my kitchen than the Hour of Power or some such other crutch purveyors.

If his colleagues lament the passing of their best, they need only to put up a target in their back yards and see how often they can miss it - miss it while throwing softballs at it. Whoever's deemed best at LOOKING like they're trying to hit the bullseye while consistantly missing it can take over at MTP. For that matter, softballs might be too aggresive. Maybe they should practice with Wiffle balls. That way, NO ONE gets hurt!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stardust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 03:43 PM
Response to Original message
355. Yup, you said it best, Nance, as usual. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lost4words Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
357. Kick!
8643
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happygoluckytoyou Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:12 PM
Response to Original message
358. death comes as the end..... and yet------->
Boy, when you're dead, they really fix you up. I hope to hell when I do die somebody has sense enough to just dump me in the river or something. Anything except sticking me in a goddam cemetery. People coming and putting a bunch of flowers on your stomach on Sunday, and all that crap. Who wants flowers when you're dead? Nobody. ~J.D. Salinger, The Catcher in the Rye, 1945


Death is not the greatest loss in life. The greatest loss is what dies inside us while we live. ~Norman Cousins


The graveyards are full of indispensable men. ~Charles de Gaulle


God made death so we'd know when to stop. ~Steven Stiles


Die, v.: To stop sinning suddenly. ~Elbert Hubbard


Death is life's way of telling you you're fired. ~Author Unknown

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
361. Send this to the so-called news departments, Nance. They deserve
each and every single one of your comments and they need to read this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
367. Great post Nance, I agree with everything except the term MSM
There is nothing "mainstream" about the corporate media, these so-called "journalists" are all paid off by big corporations to lie. I think we need to drop the term mainstream media and call them what they really are.

Aside from that however your post is spot on, great job once again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-19-08 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #367
417. I refer to them as the CPM - Corporate Propaganda Ministry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 05:00 PM
Response to Original message
370. Thank you, Nance ---
and I agree that journalism as featured on TV has reached its third act ---
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mosaic Donating Member (851 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
371. MSM is what they want you to call them
MSM is what they want you to call them so they can keep the meme alive that they are mainstream. To growing amounts of internet citizens, the blogosphere, forums like DU, and independent sites are the new mainstream. Corporate media should be called corporate media until everyone knows this as a fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
La Coliniere Donating Member (581 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
372. K & R
You took the words out of my mouth and made them better!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Faygo Kid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 05:43 PM
Response to Original message
373. I posted this when Tony Snow's cancer was announced in '06. Same principle. Great job, NG.
Tony Snow weeps today - for himself, of course (NBC just now).

Look, I wish no illness on anyone, but NBC Nightly News just had a report about Tony Snow and the illness he has faced over the last year. Tearfully, the new Bush press secretary said he told Chris Wallace that it "was the best thing that ever happened to me." I didn't think Brian Williams would be able to refrain from breaking down.

Here, Brian thought, is a peer. Not some anonymous person in Peoria who lost their health insurance, or a single Mom in LA trying to raise two kids on two minimum wage jobs, or a laid off 56 year old whose pension has been taken from him and has been "laid off" and has no chance - none - of again finding a good job. No, Brian wept, as Joe Klein or Richard Cohen would, because this was truly a Peer. A wealthy, inside-the-beltway journalist with nice hair. One who just assumed the job of Press Secretary to an Administration that long ago surpassed Nixon, Harding, Buchanan, et al as the worst in American history, and to a president without honor, honesty, intelligence or competence. . . .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 06:16 PM
Response to Original message
374. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Malloy63 Donating Member (12 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:02 PM
Response to Original message
382. wow.
u never met him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ourbluenation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
383. yo writer - you can't draw the line at being told a great journalist has passed.
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 08:04 PM by ourbluenation
If it's told to you that's someone else's line. You draw the line at agreeing what was told to you. At any rate, I'm not offended because you don't think he was a great journalist and I can't understand why anyone would be. I thought he was ok. I was growing weary of his gotcha schtick..."In 1985 you said this, and now you say this...which is it?" But the majority of the candidates interviewed, from both sides of the isle, say he was fair and prepared, including our nominee. That's good enough for me.

You don't have to indulge in anyone else "hurting". Just change the channel. But his colleagues are clearly in pain, processing a shocking death of a dear coworker and the quotes you put around "hurting" comes across as if you don't believe they are hurting. If you don't believe it, just say so. And also.."wail like inconsolable children"? Really? I haven't seen any wailing and by god neither have you. That was a cheap shot. Tim Russert was not responsible for our current woes. The people who voted for these fools are. If people are unable to sort through the media noise then shame on them.

I just don't know what the point of this diary was. It's hifalutin flame bait, seems to me. This is not your finest hour. I hope that doesn't offend you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #383
386. I disagree with this sentence
"Tim Russert was not responsible for our current woes. The people who voted for these fools are. If people are unable to sort through the media noise then shame on them."

If somebody keeps blaring their stereo noise incessantly, it's not shame on you because you can't hear around it. It's like Spider Man's Uncle Ben told him "with great power comes great responsibility", yes that was a fictitious movie but there is truth in it nonetheless. The corporate media have the power of the one way megaphone, they were the information source the people depended on to make wise decisions, only the growing Internet is beginning to balance against it, but that wasn't the case before.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ourbluenation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #386
388. well most DU'rs can filter out the bullshit so why can't others? I say it's laziness. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #388
396. To begin with D.U. wasn't even around in the 90s and the Internet was
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 08:53 PM by Uncle Joe
was only a fraction of it's current size to the general public. I believe this is why Al Gore worked so hard to get the nation wired, so the people would have access to unlimited information and critical analysis and I believe this is why the corporate media spread the lies and slander about him.

I also believe some people are more gifted than others in spotting propaganda but without a major two way source of mass communication to compete with the handful of corporations that own 90% of everything the American People see on television, hear on the radio or read in publications, how could they warn their fellow citizens? I don't believe the people are lazy, so much as absorbed with their everyday lives, they were simply not aware of the danger or even the reality, that they were living in a corporate media created Matrix. In short, they trusted their news sources, although after the past seven plus years, I believe more of them are waking up and being unplugged from that illusion.

I also believe the pooling of our minds creates a greater mind or higher group intelligence and because of this, people on D.U. are ahead of the curve on awareness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
totodeinhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #388
397. Exactly, and that's why I have no patience with the Dem senators who voted for the war.
Many of us knew from day one that the war was a lie. The MSM stood by on the sidelines cheering for the war, but we knew better. And so if a regular Joe like me knew that there were no WMD's and there was no good reason to go into Iraq, why didn't those Dem senators who voted for the war know that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #383
400. Well . . .
you were "growing weary of his gotcha schtick," but you watched anyway . ..

Many people are "hurting" and "in pain" but they don't require a TV audience --
I think it's clear that when we are dealing with people who feel they need an audience
to watch their suffering that we might begin to question their sincerity?

Tim Russert helped move the Iraq war ... and in not appropriately challenging this administration
on their lawless behavior, he was aiding and abetting them.

As for votes, sadly we also know that votes have been overcome by computer counting which has
provided a rather simple way for the GOP to steal elections. The majority of Americans voted
for Gore --- and presumably the majority of Americans voted for Kerry, if we consider what went
down in Ohio.

I think NBC-GE has probably done itself great harm in this self-indulgent week ---
we'll see . . .






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seeker4ever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
387. Powerful and Right On!
Being one of their own is nothing to take pride in these days and perhaps that is the crux of the matter; a subliminal need to mourn not the passing of a journalist, but the demise of true TV journalism itself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ooglymoogly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 08:37 PM
Response to Original message
389. A perfect answer for the M$M imposed hair shirt that many even here
on DU have cloaked themselves in quite sanctimoniously and I would add; Let those colleagues who would mourn TR go off and mourn privately and I can respect that; but the airwaves are not yours to co-opt for your private 24/7 grief and the rewriting of a sad history to aggrandize your delusional and pathetic part in this countries present catastrophe of the last 7 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:41 PM
Response to Original message
404. Holy fuck this thread has a shitload of views
Just over 9000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 11:28 PM
Response to Original message
405. THIS TRUTH CANNOT BE RECOMMENDED HIGHLY ENOUGH.
Fan

frigging

tastic.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deutsey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 06:38 AM
Response to Original message
409. Did these same MSM journalists mourn this way for their colleagues who were intentionally killed
in Iraq?

http://www.democracynow.org/2005/3/23/hotel_palestine_k...

It's an honest question...I rarely watch corporate-owned news media.

That said, I agree with the original post. Russert seems to have been a decent guy and the abruptness of his death is very sad.

However, I think the OP puts this tragic passing in a context that both respects the deceased and points to a larger truth.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janetblond Donating Member (437 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 07:04 AM
Response to Original message
410. Excellent! Why are we glorifying the inept MSM bobble heads? nt
geesh!
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 Fri Jul 11th 2014, 04:06 AM
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