1970cs @ 73

To my knowledge no member of the media has been held accountable for any falsehood reported leading up to Bush’s war in 2003. From this premise why would anyone in the media care about being accurate if their are no consequences?

There was a link a few days ago on this. Sorry I don’t have it. That compared how those who were wrong about Iraq Kristol, Beinart, and Zakaria had careers that had only gone up while those like Ritter and Shearer (formerly of the LA Times) who were right had seen their careers go downhill. If anything there is a perverse incentive going on here.

Here’s the link for the article from Radar Online:http://www.radaronline.com/features/2007/01/betting_on_iraq_1.php

Nice analysis. Thank you for volunteering.

Corporate control of the media (and government) is a definite factor in maintaining the current fascist status quo. As a former small town radio reporter, (a job description that doesn’t exist anymore), I experienced the owner’s editorial control. It’s a million times worse at the conglomerate level where it’s all about the bottom line. News is just part of the Entertainment Division.

He seems, actually, a rather tragic figure to me.

I have not read all the comments, but was going through them looking for what I found as early as Peterr’s (supra).

Peterr’s point (and, admittedly, perhaps high-lighted after comment #14, though un-read by me) that I would like to emphasize, is that bloggers are Not Reporting; rather, the blogosphere is populated by Meta-Editors.

And that is a good thing.

If ! support ! empty para >

I do remember that whole dust up with White/Enron that the other commenter talked about and I remember how Leopold’s report was finally vindicated during the Skilling trial. I think it was like three years later but still. Seems like Gary Webb redux. Except this time its the bloggers who are joining in.

Oh, and btw, doesn’t the root meaning of “journalism” mean about the same thing as diarying? What, after all, is the difference between a journal and a diary?

Bloggers and journalists are, after all, in a similar business: neither is a matter of mere self expression; both are interested in cultivating an audience. To do that, you have to build trust with readers who will come back for more.

There is a third side of this triangle: entertainment. Journalism in some quarters has become little more than a form of entertainment, and there is every gradation between the two. Blogging is not above entertainment, either: The original Wonkette, for example, had a large component of entertainment in it (panda love???) I eventually stopped visiting the Wonkette page because (a) the original Wonkette withdrew, and (b) the educational content faded.

I predict that the line between blogging and journalism will become increasingly blurred. It may be that in terms of professional credentialing, “journalism” will remain a “profession” and “blogging” will still be considered a “hobby,” but I see a lot of convergence. And FDL coverage of the Libby trial is a good example.

Bob in HI

When I look at the counterparts, any counterpart on the MSM, it’s as if they live on another planet! Sure, you have Olberman, who has been improving over the last several years, but what else? Any truly honest journalist have been forced out or/and marginalized. Bill Moyers is a good example. Replaced by Tucker Carlson?!? Excuse me while I projectile vomit!

Reporters should be objective and impartial with the facts, yada, yada, yada. Alas, I don’t think they know what that even means today. Frankly, as a human being working for a massive, omnipresent corporation, fearful of the slightest negative liberally oriented criticism, how can you ever be that? The “agenda” is always there. All too often, balance is having the one, well paid shill, for some corporate front group weighing in against 99% of the community and the facts at hand while being stoked and blown on the questions given. That’s impartial? Sorry, equating stealing a candy bard and stealing a country as being balanced on the subject of stealing is anything but.

In the end, you have to ask yourself: who you are, what do you want and whom (what) will you serve? The ones that have answered these questions and still work for the MSM are, mostly, the shills, the paid talking heads or enforcers known as editors and producers. The front men and face of an agenda that is anything but “We the people”. The ones that haven’t answered these questions satisfactorily for themselves are the idealistic dupes in training to be shills; for the most part. The best initiative they can hope to do is report a fact, and even that has to be cross verified six ways to Sunday to ascertain the truth of it.

I’m glad you are making new friends and I understand you have to all be smiley and chummy in the bullpen. Still, try not to loose your perspective when interacting with these corporate shills and dupes.

He had enough people wanting to quiet him with his work on White/Enron that was vindicated. Funny too how that circle overlaps with the same ones that got him bounced.

I don’t think that qualifies for “atrocious” reporting. Meanwhile, Judith Miller brought us to war and so did every other paper and reporter except for Jon Landman at Knight ridder. this is really starting to become a ridiculous popularity contest about who is good and who is bad.

I’ll tell you all something. When the leopold crap hit the fan I bought a copy of his book out of sheer curiousity. I learned more about the MSM and what goes on behind the scenes in his book. I agree with rose that what leopold wrote about Kurtz probably pissed kurtz off.

Whatever leopold’s deal I don’t know but singling out him seems to really be stupid.