Just keep blogging...
Posted by The Truth at January 8, 2006 08:12 AMWe're just going to have to accept a love-hate relationship with traditional media. On the one hand, we have the partisan hackery you've described (plus a number of other examples, e.g., the fact that neither the NYT, nor other traditional media has ever covered the voting "irregularities" in Ohio, including the scathing report from the GAO; or the fact that they published information about the Downing Street Memo only very, very reluctantly). On the other hand, even considering the NYT published the spy scandal a year late, they did publish it, and more to the point have employed and assigned the investigative reporters who produced the goods. Without the NYT we might still not know about this. Without the WaPo we might not know a lot of the seamy details of the Abramoff/Delay scandals. I think we need to adopt the attitude of a teacher who is training a talented pupil to perform consistently. Reward the good acts, punish the bad acts, and hope the performance improves.
The only alternative is for the blogosphere to replace these sources of original reporting. This may ultimately happen on the web -- there are more and more web-based outfits doing original reporting (who need to be rewarded as well), but they've not yet reached maturity in either reliability or influence.
The good news is, even though the traditional media often seems to hate and fear the blogosphere, they do read the blogs, and web-based pushback, as recently happened when some insiders at the WaPo appeared to be threatening Froomkin, has obvious and immediate effects. Just keep those carrots and sticks coming, folks, we may get this straightened out yet.
Posted by mamayaga at January 8, 2006 09:17 AMcan we have a cite for rich's irresponsibility, cause i don't remember it.
Posted by benjoya at January 8, 2006 10:02 AMbenjoya,
I'm with you. I don't remember a time when Rich wasn't hammering Bushco. As a matter of fact, he got banished from the editorial page for it. I guess he could have resigned when that happened. Maybe that's what paradox is referring to.
mamayaga, I think that's a good analysis.
Posted by KM at January 8, 2006 10:36 AMFalsum in uno, falsum in omne ought to be on page one where "All the news that's fit to print" now stands.
They've never given a coherent accounting of how Gerth got played like a cello over Whitewater, and that was ten everloving years ago.
Posted by Davis X. Machina at January 8, 2006 12:02 PMOn a related note - speaking as one who delinked from the NY Times when they went 'Select' - how do I support cerain individuals (Krugman, Herbert and Rich, Risen) employed by them without giving a dime to their employer?
Buy their books? I've bought some of them and I have Risen's latest on order. Beyond that?
Posted by Michael Miller at January 8, 2006 12:10 PMhttp://www.truthout.org/index.htm
publishes Frank Rich and Paul Krugman / you can prolly support them by contact them individually
Posted by Katherine Hunter at January 8, 2006 01:13 PM"On the other hand, even considering the NYT published the spy scandal a year late, they did publish it, and more to the point have employed and assigned the investigative reporters who produced the goods.
Let us remember that the NYT really had no choice but to publish this a month ahead of Risen's book. Had Risen's book been due to be published in 2010, that is when the NYT would have broken the story.
Posted by m at January 8, 2006 04:58 PMThe truth:
the Times had to lay off some people in its marketing department who are taking revenge by sliming the paper in the liberal blogs.
The right wing is delirioiusly happy and helping out any way they can.
In yesterday's Times I read a Pentagon Study says that 80% of the Marine deaths in Iraq would have been avoided if the body armor had been up to date.
2 days ago, in the Times, I read that Bush is handing out more money per household to Haley Barbour's Mississippi than to the citizens in blue city New Orleans.
I also read that a male teacher was decapitated by the Taliban for teaching young women in a highschool.
Even better a non partisan agency asked by congress to investigate wiretapping said the patriot act did not give Bush the power to do that, and it may not be legal.
This is the best newspaper in the world. It isn't perfect, but
there is none better.
The Times is on the right wing hit list, and they want it weakened bad.
Really a shame to see the liberal blogs taken in by what is going on.
Posted by Josh at January 8, 2006 05:18 PMThis isn't an original point at all, but:
When are these dumb bastards gonna realize that no matter how much you kiss Bush's ass, it will never be enough?
They loose Miller on the world, they bury the FISA story (& Ghod only knows what else) long enough to get him re-elected, and publish finally under the pressure of Risen's book release, and the Bushistas are still calling out the lynch mob on 'em.
Why (why, why) not just sort of maintain some journalistic integrity? 'Cause they're gonna try to frak you anyway.
Er ya ought to read the NYT occasionally,. Yhey've been going in on Bushco relentlessly.
I subscribe, and it's a wonder that only one reporter has been murdered.
Posted by Josh at January 9, 2006 07:38 AMThe Times is like the those rivers in China (here also) that you can drink from, but you never know exactly how polluted and poisoned it is at any given time. On the other hand, it's not a river of shit, like, say, Fox News.
Posted by Amphibian at January 9, 2006 10:03 AMI'd give you a 4 rating for that one. If you could do such things here. If you want to really appreciate NYT try a year of Tinsel Town Times. The level of "Teen Magazine" and when they get excited, they editorialize on their front page.
Posted by Josh at January 9, 2006 02:48 PMAh well, this explains a lot:
Posted by Josh at January 9, 2006 03:11 PM