The Media Memes

I am sad to say that I have neglected this blog of late and so it feels good to be back in the saddle. I cannot guarantee how often I shall be able to post, but i shall commit to doing better this year than I did last year.

Why am I posting again? Well, I was depressed and concerned after the epic wipeout by the left in the 2008 elections, not to mention the media malfeasance that allowed a woefully unprepared and inexperienced politicians without a single achievement or any experience in much of anything to be elected President of the United States. In the past two years, we have clearly seen how much damage this unqualified President has done. And the voters rightfully paid back the tone-deaf and arrogant leftists who would not listen to their concerns. Can the Republicans do a better job? I am unconvinced, but i am willing to give them a chance. Certainly new Speaker John Boehner seems to understand that his party is governing on a very thin tolerance. We shall see.

However, that is not the main reason for this post. Recently there has been a vicious and well-planned campaign by the Left to blame conservative voices - particularly former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin - for the attempted murder of Arizona Representative Gabrielle Giffords. At this time I shall not engage in dealing that piece of verbal assassination - it has been well-debunked in many other places. However, I would like to remind anyone who stumbles across this blog that the media has a long and sordid history of trying to manipulate public opinion with false and misleading reporting. Walter Cronkite's infamous lie about the Tet Offensive comes to mind fairly quickly, as does Dan Rather and Mary Mapes' failed attempt to use forged documents to swing a Presidential election. Yes, I know I'm linking to a very sympathetic report from NPR, but the point is that even NPR was forced to admit that what Mapes and Rather did was utterly wrong.

More recently, a large group of leftist writers and bloggers put together a well-organized machine for coordinating memes called JournoList. Though JournoList is supposedly dead, I have no doubt that a successor (probably with a slightly smaller membership) still exists.

Just as a reminder, these are the people who tried (and are almost certainly still trying) to shape the news to ensure that their particular agenda gets the best possible coverage. They also engaged in some extremely hateful speech and used far more violent terminology than anything any figure on the political Right has done in the last forty years. In other words, they did exactly what they are accusing the Right of doing in the Loughner case - they incited hate with their rhetoric.

The 150 names on this list come from (The Vail Spot). I haven't confirmed them on my own, so this may not be entirely accurate. Suffice to say that any time you read anything from any one of these would-be propagandists or the media that employs them, I recommend both a hearty dose of skepticism AND a thorough fact-checking. They have proven themselves to be untrustworthy.

The JournoList:

1. Spencer Ackerman - Wired, FireDogLake, Washington Independent, Talking Points Memo, TheAmerican Prospect
2. Thomas Adcock - New York Law Journal
3. Ben Adler - Newsweek, POLITICO
4. Mike Allen - POLITICO
5. Eric Alterman - The Nation, Media Matters for America
6. Marc Ambinder - The Atlantic
7. Greg Anrig - The Century Foundation
8. Ryan Avent - Economist
9. Dean Baker - The American Prospect
10. Nick Baumann - Mother Jones
11. Josh Bearman - LA Weekly
12. Steven Benen - The Carpetbagger Report
13. Ari Berman - The Nation
14. Jared Bernstein - Economic Policy Institute
15. Michael Berube - Crooked Timer, Pennsylvania State University
16. Brian Beutler - The Media Consortium
17. Lindsay Beyerstein - Freelance journalist
18. Joel Bleifuss - In These Times
19. John Blevins - South Texas College of Law
20. Sam Boyd - The American Prospect
21. Ben Brandzel - MoveOn.org, John Edwards Campaign
22. Shannon Brownlee - Author, New America Foundation
23. Will Bunch - Philadelphia Daily News
24. Rich Byrne - Playwright
25. Jonathan Chait - The New Republic
26. Lakshmi Chaudry - In These Times
27. Isaac Chotiner - The New Republic
28. Ta-Nehisi Coates - The Atlantic
29. Michael Cohen - New America Foundation
30. Jonathan Cohn - The New Republic
31. Joe Conason - The New York Observer
32. Lark Corbeil - Public News Service
33. David Corn - Mother Jones
34. Daniel Davies - The Guardian
35. David Dayen - FireDogLake
36. Brad DeLong - The Economists’ Voice, University of California at Berkeley
37. Ryan Donmoyer - Bloomberg News
38. Adam Doster - In These Times
39. Kevin Drum - Washington Monthly
40. Matt Duss - Center for American Progress
41. Gerald Dworkin - UC Davis
42. Eve Fairbanks - The New Republic
43. Henry Farrell - George Washington University
44. Tim Fernholz - American Prospect
45. Dan Froomkin - Huffington Post, Washington Post
46. Jason Furman - Brookings Institution
47. James Galbraith - University of Texas at Austin
48. Kathleen Geier - Talking Points Memo
49. Todd Gitlin - Columbia University
50. Ilan Goldenberg - National Security Network
51. Arthur Goldhammer - Harvard University
52. Dana Goldstein - The Daily Beast
53. Andrew Golis - Talking Points Memo
54. Jaana Goodrich - Blogger
55. Merrill Goozner - Chicago Tribune
56. David Greenberg - Slate
57. Robert Greenwald - Brave New Films
58. Chris Hayes - The Nation
59. Don Hazen - Alternet
60. Jeet Heer - Canadian Journolist
61. Jeff Hauser - Political Action Committee, Dennis Shulman Campaign
62. Michael Hirsh - Newsweek
63. James Johnson - University of Rochester
64. John Judis - The New Republic, The American Prospect
65. Foster Kamer - The Village Voice
66. Michael Kazin - Georgetown University
67. Ed Kilgore - Democratic Strategist
68. Richard Kim - The Nation
69. Charlie Kireker - Air America Media
70. Mark Kleiman - UCLA The Reality Based Community
71. Ezra Klein - Washington Post, Newsweek, The American Prospect
72. Joe Klein - TIME
73. Robert Kuttner - American Prospect, Economic Policy Institute
74. Paul Krugman - The New York Times, Princeton University
75. Lisa Lerer - POLITICO
76. Daniel Levy - Century Foundation
77. Ralph Luker - Cliopatria
78. Annie Lowrey - Washington Independent
79. Robert Mackey - New York Times
80. Mike Madden - Salon
81. Maggie Mahar - The Century Foundation
82. Dylan Matthews - Harvard University
83. Alec McGillis - Washington Post
84. Scott McLemee - Inside Higher Ed
85. Sara Mead - New America Foundation
86. Ari Melber - The Nation
87. David Meyer - University of California at Irvine
88. Seth Michaels - MyDD.com
89. Luke Mitchell - Harper’s Magazine
90. Gautham Nagesh - The Hill, Daily Caller
91. Suzanne Nossel - Human Rights Watch
92. Michael O’Hare - University of California at Berkeley
93. Josh Orton - MyDD.com, Air America Media
94. Rodger Payne - University of Louisville
95. Rick Perlstein - Author, Campaign for America’s Future
96. Nico Pitney - Huffington Post
97. Harold Pollack - University of Chicago
98. Katha Pollitt - The Nation
99. Ari Rabin-Havt - Media Matters
100. Joy-Ann Reid - South Florida Times
101. David Roberts - Grist
102. Lamar Robertson - Partnership for Public Service
103. Sara Robinson - Campaign For America's Future
104. Alyssa Rosenberg - Washingtonian, The Atlantic, Government Executive
105. Alex Rossmiller - National Security Network
106. Michael Roston - Newsbroke
107. Laura Rozen - POLITICO, Mother Jones
108. Felix Salmon - Reuters
109. Greg Sargent - Washington Post
110. Thomas Schaller - Baltimore Sun
111. Noam Scheiber - The New Republic
112. Michael Scherer - TIME
113. Mark Schmitt - American Prospect, The New America Foundation
114. Rinku Sen - ColorLines Magazine
115. Julie Bergman Sender - Balcony Films
116. Adam Serwer - American Prospect
117. Walter Shapiro - PoliticsDaily.com
118. Kate Sheppard - Mother Jones
119. Matthew Shugart - UC San Diego
120. Nate Silver - FiveThirtyEight.com
121. Jesse Singal - The Boston Globe, Washington Monthly
122. Ann-Marie Slaughter - Princeton University
123. Ben Smith - POLITICO
124. Sarah Spitz - KCRW
125. Adele Stan - The Media Consortium
126. Paul Starr - The Atlantic
127. Kate Steadman - Kaiser Health News
128. Jonathan Stein - Mother Jones
129. Sam Stein - Huffington Post
130. Matt Steinglass - Deutsche Presse-Agentur
131. James Surowiecki - The New Yorker
132. Jesse Taylor - Pandagon.net
133. Steven Teles - Yale University
134. Mark Thoma - The Economists' View
135. Michael Tomasky - The Guardian
136. Jeffrey Toobin - CNN, The New Yorker
137. Rebecca Traister - Salon
138. Tracy Van Slyke - The Media Consortium
139. Paul Waldman - Author, American Prospect
140. Dave Weigel - Washington Post, MSNBC, The Washington Independent
141. Moira Whelan - National Security Network
142. Scott Winship - Pew Economic Mobility Project
143. J. Harry Wray - DePaul University
144. D. Brad Wright - University of NC at Chapel Hill
145. Kai Wright - The Root
146. Holly Yeager - Columbia Journalism Review
147. Rich Yeselson - Change to Win
148. Matthew Yglesias - Center for American Progress, The Atlantic Monthly
149. Jonathan Zasloff - UCLA
150. Julian Zelizer - Princeton University
151. Avi Zenilman - POLITICO


The source:
Free Republic Webcache

My Take:
Again, I have not done the legwork to confirm these are really all Journolisters. However, none of these names have so far challenged the accusation of being members. So I think that the odds are pretty good that they really were Journolisters. And if so, then they are folks that have forfeited any trust on the part of the general public. They are no more honest reporters than was the infamous Walter Duranty (Stalin's tool who worked so hard to cover up the man-made famine in 1930s-era Ukraine). Feel free to pass this on to remind people just how dishonest and hypocritical the media really is.

Oh, and one more thing. The next time these self-satisfied hypocritical hatemongers try to call for 'civility', or blame a politician for the acts of a madman, let's remind them of their own words in the privacy of their little community. Remind them too that every single political act of violence since 1960 - with the sole possible exception of Tim McVeigh - has been perpetrated by the Left.

Still Rather Complaining

Dan Rather apparently cannot tell when he crosses from simple hilarity to the realms of ridicule. Apparently not content with suing CBS, claiming that the network scapegoated him after he presented a false story that sought to impugn President George W. Bush's Vietnam-era Texas Air National Guard service, Rather made the astonishing claim today that government and large corporations were the primary reasons that he was removed as anchor of CBS Evening News. As reported by the Associated PRess, Rather told CNN's Larry King that government and large corporations have influence in newsrooms. According to the AP story,

Dan Rather said Thursday that the undue influence of the government and large corporations over newsrooms spurred his decision to file a $70 million lawsuit against CBS and its former parent company.
"Somebody, sometime has got to take a stand and say democracy cannot survive, much less thrive with the level of big corporate and big government interference and intimidation in news," he said on CNN's "Larry King Live."

So government has influence in newsrooms? Government was unable to prevent the New York Times from spilling national security secrets on at least two separate occasions last year, despite requests from elected officials on both sides of the aisle. And government certainly has not been able to influence the remorseless and uncalled for attacks on this Administration, nor has government managed to halt the relentless one-sided reporting engaged in by all the major networks on the campaign in Iraq. Nor has government been able to make the media wake up and cover events that actually deserve coverage, such as the Holy Land Foundation trial ongoing in Dallas, nor the case of the Flying Imams, nor the close ties of an elected official, Keith Ellison, to the Nation of Islam and the Council of American Islamic Relations (CAIR)- the latter of which is an organization that has been named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land case.

Big corporations? Of course news outlets are corporations that exist, in the infamous words of the Harry Potter journalist Rita Skeeter, 'to sell themselves". And there is no questions that they are always trying to better their sales. But the ideological content of the newsrooms- proven time and again to be far to the left of the general public has also caused these organizations' sales to fall, and not one of the news organizations in questions has tried to determine why their sales are constantly falling, though it has been posited in many places that the lack of balance in most if not all the so-called mainstream media. Certainly business decisions can affect coverage, but the wrioters seem oblivious to how their out-of-touch opinionating has causede their employers' stock to suffer. So we can discount this as well.

In short, Rather seems to have finally slipped over the edge into true paranoia. Regarding the panel that investigated his work on the fake Guard story, he told Larry King,

"This was in many ways a fraud. It was a setup," he told King.

It was Rather's own attempted setup of a sitting President and the blind ideological focus of his team, especially his producer Mary Mapes, who had been apparently chasing this non-story for five years, that caused Rather's fall. Yet he cannot even admit that he was wrong- all he can do is cast paranoid theories to his sympathizers. Nor can he take responsibility for his own actions. Rather and Mapes tried to take down a President and ended up ending their own careers. That is no one's fault but their ownm, and their sad attempts to blame other simply reveal their lack of maturity and ability to take responsibility for their own actions. This lawsuit and the wild claims accompnaying it are just the latest attempt to shift the blame for something that was entirely of Rather's own making.

Rather Whiny

Dan Rather stepped down as anchor of CBS Evening News due to his complicity in a report thatused forged and falsified documents to accuse George W. Bush of neglecting his duties as a member of the Texas Air National Guard. Although Rather was not fired, he was forced to step down as anchor by the public fallout, and his career came to a fairly ignoble end.

One would think that Rather might have understood that one does not make provably false claims against a sitting U.S. President in the heat of an election and hope to come out looking good. One would be incorrect. The New York Times is reporting today that Rather has filed suit against CBS for 70 million dollars. According to the Times,

Mr. Rather, 75, asserts that the network violated his contract by giving him insufficient airtime on “60 Minutes” after forcing him to step down as anchor of the “CBS Evening News” in March 2005. He also contends that the network committed fraud by commissioning a “biased” and incomplete investigation of the flawed Guard broadcast and, in the process, “seriously damaged his reputation.”

The suit, which seeks $70 million in damages, names as defendants CBS and its chief executive, Leslie Moonves; Viacom and its executive chairman, Sumner Redstone; and Andrew Heyward, the former president of CBS News

.

So Dan Rather, after trying to use the power of the media to falsely accuse a President of something that he did not do, and using shoddy an biased source material, which even CBS had to admit was not authenticated, he has the gall to accuse his network of using bias against him! This, while he stands as one of the most, if the the most, biased reporters in the sad history of the portwar American media. Only the false stories filed by Walter Duranty in Ukraine and Walter Cronkite on the Tet can surpass Rather's years of biased reporting.

Don't Cry for Me Dan

Dan Rather apparently has succumbed to the well-known phenomenon of viewing the past through rose-colored glasses. This despite being a member of the baby boom generation- one not known for either introspection or for much humility. This was the generation that was so convinced of its own purity- and is still not very good at taking stock of its failures, as was famously proven by Bill Clintons' eight scandal-ridden years in the WHite House!

Rather, according to Matt Drudge, claims that there is a "new journalism order" and said that a climate of fear is running through newsrooms "worse than anything he had seen in his more than four-decade career".He also whined that politicians had gotten better at applying pressure to the corporate entities that run most journalistic enterprises.

Well, gee, Dan. Since you members of the Fourth Estate have twisted your role from reporter of events to arbiter of society, and can't or won't observe either objectivity or just come out and admit your biases, don't you think that politicians might strike back the only way they can- at your bosses pocketbooks? The First Amendment exists, like it or not, to protect mainly political speech of the type you (mostly) engage in, not porn, despite what you folks on the Left would like to believe. Therefore, since politicians cannot regulate the Press they way a United Kingdom can, they are going to make life uncomfortable for your corporate bosses, instead of directly attacking you.

This is simply more proof that the Exempt Media cannot come to grips with the fact that they are no longer able to get away with the partisan, untruthful and biased 'rfeporting' that they have engaged in for the better part of the last fifty years. Welcome to the New Order, Dan. I personally prefer it to what went before.