Journalism

The whole backstory to the AP vs. Rogers Cadenhead fiasco is already posted at the Media Bloggers Association site. Go read it. And here's Rogers version, by the way.

In discussing all the whisper campaign unleashed by the enemies of Barack Obama, I mentioned once to some fellow bloggers that The Rumor is The Smear. You don't have to have evidence of a tape of Michelle Obama backing cookies in the shape of a sickle and hammer. The Rumor is the Smear.

With The Rumor alone you can destroy an opponent with never having to demonstrate a shred of supporting evidence. The Rumor calls the rather strong heard-instinct in Americans. The Rumor is like a Siren-song and whomever creates the strongest Rumor, will be able to command the attention and control the point of view of the majority of the herd around them.

The Rumor taps into this country's collective need and penchant for psychopathic collective hysteria. Remember the Salem Witch Trials. Enough said.

Fox News had Michelle Malkin on yesterday discussing some thing or another having to do with the dark-skinned Filipina's attacks and demonization of presumptive First Lady Michelle Obama. So what does the Fox News editorial team do during the conservative racist baiter's time on TV? They put a banner right under the news bit that read : "Outraged Liberals : Stop Picking on Obama's Baby Mama".

As Oliver Willis says quite correctly, why not call her a N***r and get it over and done with it? Why not just turn Fox News into what it really is, a race-baiter's dream machine?

Kevin Hayden says' the channel should be fined by the FCC a minimum of $325,000 for publishing hate speech. Even though I agree with Stefania this proves the extreme right is scared shitless at the prospect of seeing the Obamas in the White House, it's still utterly wrong and those bastards should pay every time they pull this shit.

Yet what's most important about all this mess is the other Michelle. La Malkin. Why do you think Fox News has on their payroll a dark-skinned Filipina who is not only their quite giddy and willing cover for the racist rants you pass as news, but also something of a news maker herself?

Robert Shales is right on the money when he says, To this observer, ABC's coverage seemed slanted against Obama. Memeorandum exploded in posts from irate liberals and journalists who saw nothing but a thinly vieled hatchet job against the front-runner of the Democratic Party.

Close to fifteen thousand people have sounded off at the ABC News post about the debate (which, by the way, they changed from "Clinton, Obama find brotherly love at Philly Debate" to "Philly Fight Night : Democrats Spar over Electability").

I suggest you add to the comments over there as well as give a ring to their offices :

Call 818-460-7477
Press 2,
Press 1

Then you can press one of these two choices :

967 (News wth Charles Gibson) or
199 (other news)

As I wrote at the chat last night, it's as if ABC News wanted to outfox FOX News. It was an incredibly embarrassing scene to watch.

Not only that, George Stephanopoulos should not have been one of the moderators. As the former speech writer of Bill Clinton and still a Clintonista, if you are going to have someone so biased, then you ought to create balance. Which is why I shall forever refer to him as "Clinton's Boy".

I'd like to you take a moment to track the progression of how journalists like to muck around with the political process without being accountable to anybody but their editorial boards.

Yesterday I was happy to go to bat for John McCain, thanks to the New York Times incredibly crass hit job. Well, today the Managing Editor of the Seattle Post Intelligencer has this to say about the NY Times' hatchet job:

Admitting that Keller was in a better position to vet the sourcing and facts than I am as, basically, a reader, let's assume that every source is solid and every fact attributed in the story to an anonymous source is true. You're still dealing with a possible appearance of impropriety, eight years ago, that is certainly unproven and probably unprovable.

Where is the solid evidence of this lobbyist improperly influencing (or bedding) McCain? I didn't see it in the half-dozen times I read the story. In paragraphs fifty-eight through sixty-one of the sixty-five-paragraph story, the Times points out two matters in which McCain took actions favorable to the lobbyist's clients -- that were also clearly consistent with his previously stated positions.

That's pretty thin beer.

And the "it must be so because it's in The New York Times" argument will never hold much water after Judith Miller and Ahmed Chalabi got done perforating it.

Go read the amazing homage written in the Wall Street Journal by his father :

When an unarmed journalist is killed, we are reminded of both the freedoms that we treasure in our society, and how vulnerable we all are to forces that threaten those freedoms.

But this still does not explain the attention given to Danny's tragedy. After all, 30 other journalists were killed in 2002, and 118 journalists have been killed in Iraq alone since that war began.

The shocking element in Danny's murder was that he was killed, not for what he wrote or planned to write, but for what he represented -- America, modernity, openness, pluralism, curiosity, dialogue, fairness, objectivity, freedom of inquiry, truth and respect for all people. In short, each and every one of us was targeted in Karachi in January of 2002.

It's not a touchy feely homage, but a reminder that Daniel Pearl's blood is in all our hands, especially the media :

One of the things that saddens me most is that the press and media have had an active, perhaps even major role in fermenting hate and inhumanity. It was not religious fanaticism alone.

This was first brought to my attention by the Pakistani Consul General who came to offer condolences at our home in California. When we spoke about the anti-Semitic element in Danny's murder she said: "What can you expect of these people who never saw a Jew in their lives and who have been exposed, day and night, to televised images of Israeli soldiers targeting and killing Palestinian children."

At the time, it was not clear whether she was trying to exonerate Pakistan from responsibility for Danny's murder, or to pass on the responsibility to European and Arab media for their persistent de-humanization of Jews, Americans and Israelis. The answer was unveiled in 2004, when a friend told me that photos of Muhammad Al Dura were used as background in the video tape of Danny's murder.

[...]

The Pakistani Consul was right. The media cannot be totally exonerated from responsibility for Daniel's murder, as well as for the "tsunami of hate" that has swept the world and continues to rise.

Go read the whole thing.

By far the best independent news site on the web. All they're missing is the edition printed on dead trees. Published by wunderkid, John Byrne.

Current TV is running some amazing footage from Hurricane Katrina today. They have five segments, adding up to an hour long program, filmed by Doug Kiesling, a freelance Weather Journalist. My wife and I watched it from 7-8 AM. It is next on at 11 AM (then presumably 3 PM, etc.).

Doug went to New Orleans to cover Hurricane Katrina. And he did cover it, driving around the city throughout the entire storm, filming it as it happened. The footage is amazing. The first segment shows New Orleans the day before Katrina hits when many still thought the hurricane would miss the city and few people were taking it seriously enough. The second segment covers the hours just before the storm hits. Doug talks with levee personnel and people who stayed on as the hurricane approaches. Up to that point, his footage is interesting, but not really amazing. It is from the third segment on that it is hard to look away. The third segment is filmed along Canal St. DURING the hurricane. No one else is on the road other than the police as debris flies around and the water rises. As Doug is filming, he begins to realize just how bad things are getting and decides to get the hell out. The fourth segment shows his attempts to get out as flood waters occasionally reach OVER the hood of his truck. Whatever kind of truck he had, it performed amazingly under conditions you are NOT supposed to be driving in! Finally he escapes and reaches his hotel. The fifth segment shows the aftermath and tells the horrible statistic that 20% of New Orleans' population were so poor they had no resources to evacuate the city. They were stuck there...abandoned by our government.