I can see that this is only going to get worse, with people like Bonnie Erbe trying to promote themselves as MSM “concern trolls” while clubbing the very female bloggers they purport to be supporting over the head.
Thanks so much, Bonnie. Next time let’s just not and say we did, okay?
Reader Lauren forwarded me this:
MEDIA APPEARANCE: WIMN’s Jennifer L. Pozner on PBS’s “To The Contrary with
Bonnie Erbe” this weekend (check your local listings for airtimes)Jennifer L. Pozner, Executive Director of Women In Media & News, will be
appearing this weekend on “To The Contrary with Bonnie Erbe,” PBS’s women’s
news and public affairs debate show. Topics covered on the half hour program
will include:- in light of the overwhelmingly white and male participation at YearlyKos,
the recent convention of progressive bloggers, is the blogosphere
replicating the old boys club as a new boys network online?- new census data shows that people of color are the majority in one out of
ten U.S. districts, and anti-immigration sentiment is rearing its head in
many regions…- women are 75% of “sandwich caregivers” (providing health, mental health
and day to day care for both children and the eldery simultaneously) and the
financial, medical and emotional toll it takes is extreme…Guests will include:
1. Jennifer L. Pozner, Women In Media & News2. Conservative commentator Tara Setmayer
3. US News and World Report’s Dr. Bernadine Healy
4. Former National Women’s Political Caucus chair Irene Natividad
What do I look like, a friggin’ lab rat who needs someone to speak for me? Some special needs child whose hand needs to be held gently while Those Who Know Better patiently explain what my world is like? I don’t know how you have a media panel on women in the blogosphere with no actual woman bloggers, and yet they do.
I think Adele Stan has a much better handle on where the sexism that women in the blogosphere face is coming from:
The problem stems from the fact that power begets power that resembles itself. White, male bloggers receive institutional support in ways that non-whites and women do not, be it in the form of funding, linking, quoting or bookings on political talk shows. The moment that the middle-aged white men who hold the power and the purse strings of progressive politics decide it’s a priority to see the movement’s values reflected in the attributes of its anointed messengers, the problem will cease to exist.
Thanks so much, Bonnie, for being part of the problem. People who live in glass houses should fuck in the basement. (And BTW, it’s not an “us against them” situation. There aren’t nearly enough bloggers on TV period, male or female, especially when compared to the ubiquity of the “very serious people” who brought you the War in Iraq. It was great to see Markos on MTP this morning.)
The sexism that makes it more difficult for women to keep a blog going does not come from Markos or Duncan or Stoller or other “big boys” of the blogosphere that these analysts are too ignorant to name (but do so by implication). It was Jose Vargas in his Washington Post article who called FDL “a blog about women’s issues,” which just may be the most patronizing thing aimed at us in this particular discussion. And Vargas is actually someone who is trying to understand what’s going on. He (and others) are being fed a bunch of junk by people who aren’t bloggers and should really take a look at what their own organizations are doing to promote women in the blogosphere before firing arrows into our backs.
Is your organization taking out advertising on women’s blogs? Because the sexism we face from the Blogads organization is the worst I’ve encountered in my life and probably the biggest single challenge to keeping this blog going. Are you honoring women bloggers, promoting their blogs to your membership? Are you thinking twice about clubbing the only messaging machine that the left has by feeding into this kind of destructive, patronizing bullshit? Do you really know what it’s like to run a blog and post every day as your job, and if you don’t, do you think you might ought to defer on the subject to somebody who does rather than running your mouth about something you obviously don’t know much about? And through your insinuations, are you slyly suggesting that we built this blog not on merit but via “something else?” (Wink-wink nudge-nudge know what I mean, hey Amato, BTW man, you were great).
Garance Franke-Ruta writes about a primary example of the “institutional bias” towards men that makes it more difficult for women to keep the doors open (and yet somehow we do). When Barak Obama had a one-on-one with bloggers at Yearly Kos, there were 20-25 people attending and only one – Ali Savino, who I like a great deal and who is really smart but not a blogger – was a woman. (Note: I spoke with Arianna, who said that a woman from the Huffington Post was also in attendance.) [Update: Garance now says there was only one woman there, from the Huffington Post, and another attendee puts the count more reliably at 10-12.] Now I don’t think for a minute that the Obama people sat down and said “let’s not invite any women.” What they were obviously going for, based on Garance’s information, were wonky, “serious” bloggers like Matt Yglesias and Ezra Klein. Which is fine, they can invite whoever they want, but the fact that this group was almost exclusively men is more reflective of the fact that those “serious” institutions are comprised mostly of men. And those people do get support in a way that we women in the blogosphere absolutely do not. Much like advertisers who think we’re not “serious,” the organizations that support, promote and sustain men — which are completely external to the blogosphere — are a much bigger problem than Duncan or Markos’s linking habits.
Until someone shows me proof that “men link only to men” in the liberal blogoshere, all I have to go by is our Technorati ranking (total number of links), which says we have more links than Atrios or AmericaBlog where the traffic is often higher. We’re at 195. Digby is at 387, much higher relative to her traffic than many male bloggers. Arianna’s is, of course, is the most linked blog in the political blogosphere, left or right, at #5 on Technorati. Believe me, when your advertising revenues are dependent on what that traffic is, you’re pretty cognizant of who is and isn’t linking to you, and when we discuss things amongst ourselves the whole “boys don’t link to me” is not where the problem is coming from.
I contacted Ellen Goodman of the Boston Globe and asked her for information on who generated the vague statistics she quoted in her article, but so far have not had any success at tracking this study down. You would think it was inscribed in tablets of stone though the way this crap is being pimped throughout the MSM.
Next time, ask a woman who actually blogs, okay?
Related posts:
- GRITtv Live: After the Tiller Murder, How Will Media, Activists Respond?
- Invest in Good Reporting
- What Have We Done? Single Mothers Among New Homeless Vets
- Late Night: Conservative Girls, Send Me a Dozen
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes Eric Boehlert, Bloggers on the Bus: How the Internet Changed Politics and the Press
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
hmm
So common sense is out the window, and plain facts need not be examined.
argosfalcon @ 2
Common sense is one of the most uncommon of human attributes…
Now that PBS has become largely another propaganda tool for the admin, one wonders where this is another way of discrediting the progressive blogs, by insisting they are out of touch with local citizens, women and minorities. Remember the rethug mantra, when they say something “isn’t” it really means not only that it “is” but that they are very nervous about the very “isness” of it.
Are there any sandwiches that you specialize in Jane?
You are right on target to attack this crap as strongly as possible, before it gets a toe hold and becomes the conventional wisdom. Let’s all shout it out and call them on this kind of nonsense each and every time they try it.
To me this is yet another indication of how scared the “serious” media types are. Keep up the good work, Jane. ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK!!!
Yes, the only reason I found this blog was to me in dealing with issues of water retention and bikini waxing.
I am so tired of the lamestream media.
Well, it does help push the oft repeated liberal/Democrat bashing theme used to rope in Blacks and Latinos women into the Republic sphere of thought.
“Democrats only want your vote, not your voice.”
-GSD
argosfalcon @ 2
Welcome to American journalism in the 21st Century.
Asking a woman who blogs would allow facts and first-person experience to intrude on the established narrative. Ellen Goodman’s and Bonnie Erbe’s paychecks depend on the established narrative, not facts or first-person viewpoints.
before i read anyone i read jane
the lake begat think progress, begat raw story, begat digby, begat kos
before i found firedog i thought i was the only person writing about corporate media, the liberal media myth, the fact that the democrats are the real patriots, the real supporters of our military, the real economic concervatives, the real social concervatives
i thought i was the only person that saw through the administration
i link to the lake more then any other blog and always have
i am amazed anyone has the nerve to call blogging an old boys club
If the MSM or Right really thinks the Liberal KOS community is mostly Middle Aged White Men, they must be terrified! I think they’d love to depict it as mostly women & gays and minorities, wouldn’t they?
‘Tis a puzzlement.
perris @ 10
As am I. As I stated here not too long ago, my “blogosphere” is dominated by female writers. They seem to be more interested in having a community, or at least a conversation.
You go, Jane!
What a buncha maroons.
On the internet nobody’s supposed to know you’re a dog.
I’ve always been drawn to blogs based on the content and quality of writing. And you know, at least 50% of the blogs I visit are dominated by women writers. Do I look specifically for female writing? No. Do I care who’s writing? No. I care about what’s being written.
It’s bizarre to see the insular corporate media just make up shit about the blogosphere, and then drop it onto people with gravitas as if it were fact-based. And then to see the few women in the media circles being the biggest pushers of the stupidity is even more bizarre. This is so Alice in Wonderland.
As I said last time, corporate media seems happy to acknowledge blogging is dominated by middle-aged white guys now. Six months ago it was all pimply teenagers. Clearly the initial caricature didn’t work anymore, so now they’ve moved on to the “old white guys” and “no women” lie in a new attempt to marginalize the medium of blogging. Unfortunately for the DC power elite blogging is a medium where facts boil to the surface, stupidity lives eternally and the participants have a way to make their own case.
Fozzetti @ 11
No they want to attack the strength. So they claim there is no diversity and thus label the whole movement a pack of hypocrites.
-GSD
Geez, Jane, you’re not pissed or anything, are you? Why don’t you tell us how you really feel? I would almost call that more than a rant, maybe a screed! Can’t say I blame you though. With women like you, Christy, Emptywheel, Digby, Phoenix Woman, et al, I can’t say I blame you a bit!
As I said last time, corporate media seems happy to acknowledge blogging is dominated by middle-aged white guys now. Six months ago it was all pimply teenagers.
They are trying to define the blogs.
Bam, pow, biff.
-GSD
(If there were no woman bloggers I would have a great deal more free time every day.)
“The Big Boys of Blogging don’t link to the ladies” is the same warped “hypocrite!” charge TradMed levels at John Edwards for not really caring about poor people since he’s rich. First of all, it’s not true. Secondly, even if it were true, it still wouldn’t be hypocritical. Third, it’s still not true.
Which makes it the perfect TradMed narrative: untrue; wrong even if true; and — oh, yeah! — untrue. Expect to see a great deal more of this.
It sounds like a Rovian rumor mill type of thing to subtly demonize and create insecurity in corporation advertising support for whatever they can label as negative about any blog…one could be all women, one could be too gay…one could be too radical…one could be too conspiratorial; all of which likely to ultimately fail and be money losers.
I write a science blog and it has been tough to get taken seriously. If you think women writing about politics have been marginalized by the Goodmans of the world, check out the world of females who blog about science. We’re here, but we don’t near the encouragement or attention that male bloggers (some of whom are not as good as the females) get. Sometimes I wonder why I bother… it’s like writing in a echo chamber sometimes.
Keep on keepin’ on. OilFieldGuy posted a link that lead me to this. Hope it is’nt to early for an OT. This will be this libriarians last entry. http://www.bl.uk/iraqdiary07.html
GSD: Exactly what I was implying: when they saw (or thought they saw) the makeup of the Liberal blogging community (of course they are wrong), they immediately attacked it.
dejah @ 22
If we could ever have the same ratio of women to men as there are currently men to women in government, all of this would turn around in a hurry.
Richmond @ 4
That’s right. I think that is their angle. The MSM which includes PBS and especially NPR are very worried about the liberal blogs contribution to their irrelevancy. PBS/NPR sold their souls to the Devil. They continue to dance his jig.
As a liberal NPR listener, I have been disgusted with their right wing bandwagon reporting the past eight years. The real deal is here at FDL, Digby, Raw Story, Americablog and links found herein to the real news. And the commenters at FDL are unsurpassed!
Jane, the “Technorati ranking” link points to this article. Was that deliberate?
Here’s how to contact “To The Contrary”:
Link
or
alternate link
perris @ 10
Wow! Wish i had said that. thanks, perris, for saying it for me.
a blog about “women’s issues?” Pass the crack-pipe, please. I need to get baked, too!
Best example of a white guy blog on political steroids is “Power Line,” which is based in my home town. Three conservative Dartmouth dudes (a long time ago), unrepentant Bush Republicans, playing Big Daddy Pontificator to the conservative masses.
Their site meter shows a readership roughly equivalent to FDL’s, but their site visits average .01. Tres amusant.
Can’t help but think that some of this criticism is Projection 101 from the party of Big Daddy Knows What’s Best for You.
Republicons are taking yet another run at framing an issue, and because they control most of the traditional media venues (and because Dems do crappola with framing), they’re having some success with it. Again. Already. Still. Grrrr.
Compound F @ 30
Careful. Next, this will be a blog about “drug abuse issues”.
Cujo359 @ 27
Actually it links to another article with the same graphic, but it has listed the technorati rankings of the top blogs.
I tried to write something meaningful but I have no words to prod the brain dead into life, about this.
You’d think … but then again that would be asking too much … that the woman run blog that was profiled on page one of the NYT for brilliant coverage of the Libby trial might have made it into their consciousness.
Ann in AZ @ 18
I’m pretty pissed. A lot of people collaborated with this. I don’t as a rule publicly take aim at other liberals even when they aim at me, it’s divisive and counter-productive to a movement that’s taking hits on all sides as it is. But I’m about an inch and a half from calling people out and telling them to knock it the fuck off.
Stop being a useful idiot.
Conservative commentator Tara Setmayer
The wingnuttiest of them all. She was on Bill Maher once and she said that Health Insurance is not a right but something people should have to earn, to a booing audience.
Siun @ 35
What’s the song? “Momentary Lapse Of Reason?” Just a burp in the daily annals of the news business that can’t disrupt the corporate meme.
Jane Hamsher @ 33
And a similar title. Must learn to read more carefully. Thanks.
Invisible but “Spotlighted.”
this anti-women bias in the blogosphere meme is nonsense. Collaterally, any attempt to force greater women exposure in the blogopshere in an affirmative action type activity would be contrary to the ad hoc, ‘follow-your-interests’ nature of the blogosphere.
Ellen Goodman’s recent whiny editorial about not enough women in the blogosphere was bullshit.
.
Sondheim put it best in a song famously cut from Anyone Can Whistle :
“CORA:
Cherchez la femme.
There’s always a woman
To spoil the illusion,
The rotten banana
That ruins the bunch.
There’s always a woman
Who causes confusion.
There’s nothing as low as a woman.
We must lunch.
FAY:
Love to.
CORA:
Noonish?
FAY:
Tomorrow.
CORA:
Today.
FAY:
My place?
CORA:
Mine.
FAY:
There’s always a woman,
The one disappointment.
The note that goes sour
And gums up the tune,
The ant at the picnic,
The fly in the ointment.
There’s nothing so slow as a woman.
Ring me soon!
CORA:
Love to.
FAY:
‘Voir.
CORA:
Leaving?
FAY:
I thought…
CORA:
I know.
FAY:
I tried.
BOTH:
It’s always a woman,
The counterfeit check,
FAY:
The snake in the woodpile,
CORA:
The pain in the neck.
BOTH:
The sand in the oyster
That isn’t a pearl.
There’s nothing as low as a woman…
Darling girl.
CORA:
Pet!
FAY:
Lamb!
CORA:
Dove!
FAY:
Fish.
CORA:
The run in the stocking,
The snag in the zipper,
The weather in London,
The water in France.
It’s always a woman.
It’s Jacqueline the Ripper.
There’s nothing as low as a woman.
Shall we dance?
FAY:
Waltz?
CORA:
Rhumba?
FAY:
Cancan?
CORA:
Tango?
FAY:
Schottische?
CORA:
Gavotte?
FAY:
Cha-cha?
CORA:
Tap?
FAY:
Bolero?
CORA:
Polka?
FAY:
Bridge?
CORA:
Two hearts.
FAY:
Three clubs.
CORA:
I pass.
FAY:
There’s always a woman,
A crimp in the writing,
The hole in the sidewalk,
The gum on the shoe.
She almost looks human-
It must be the lighting.
Whatever it is, it’s a woman.
How are you?
CORA:
Fine.
FAY:
Pity.
BOTH:
It’s always a woman,
FAY:
The hand in the hill,
CORA:
The five dollar diamond,
FAY:
the three-dollar bill.
BOTH:
A genius for trickery
That’s second to none.
There’s nothing as low as a woman.
Isn’t this fun?
CORA:
Lovely.
FAY:
Charming.
CORA:
Delicious.
FAY:
Stunning.
CORA:
Fabulous.
FAY:
Gorgeous.
BOTH:
Exquisite.
CORA, FAY (Alternately):
A knife would be perfect-
A gun would be perfect-
It’s quick and it’s quiet.
At least I could try it.
I hear they do wonders
And you can do wonders
With poisonous gas.
With silvers of glass,
There’s always the quarry-
There’s always curare-
She’d never be found.
I have some around.
A noose is efficient-
Bamboo is efficient-
She won’t make a sound.
As long as it’s ground.
Whatever will do it,
Whatever will do it,
If anything will.
If anything will.
BOTH:
There’s nothing as low as a woman.
CORA:
Sneak.
FAY:
Thief.
CORA:
Cheat.
FAY:
Crook.
CORA:
Frump.
FAY:
Fake.
CORA:
Bore.
FAY:
Bag.
CORA:
Leech.
FAY:
Crone.
CORA:
Witch.
FAY:
Ghoul.
BOTH:
Police!
Shoot to kill”
zoot @ 41
Contact her and tell her that.
Siun @ 35
But the Libby trial was a “woman’s issue” wasn’t it?
ellengoodman@globe.com
Siun @ 35
You’d think.
Jane Hamsher @ 36
Well, Jane, the good news is, I think you just did! Good on you!
TeddySanFran @ 44
That and the 2006 Connecticut Senate race…really, this whole business is nonsense on so many levels that you’d have to pay a geologist to sort out the stratigraphy.
The SCLM, as Eric Alterman calls them, are so nervous and scared that the public will realize what frauds they are that they have mounted this attack on bloggers. The SCLM do not attack the wingnut bloggers because there is no threat nor power there. The SCLM is attacking the wingnuts by implication. If the SCLM can neutralize or destroy the progressive (liberal) bloggers and the wingnuts get washed away at the same time there won’t be any crying by anyone, including the wingnut bloggers. After all, the SCLM can’t limit the answers and content of the retorts to their house pundits, nor the news analyses that are posted.
The SCLM, therefore, is trying desperately to apply a label that will stick. The problem is that too many liberal bloggers are too intelligent and well educated and write too well to be easily ignored or demonized. The people who are supposed to be liberal pundits are being exposed as self-proclaimed with no real good credibility.
Should PBS have had a panel with actual women bloggers? Of course, but then they would not have been able to peddle their nonsense unless the only women were compliant neocon groupies.
BearCountry @ 49
Any chance of getting Moyers to look at this issue? A greater public broadcasting presence there is not. And it’s a hot issue, yes?
Hi there,
Just FYI, I updated my blog item after publication. Ali Savino was not there; the only woman there was a woman from the Huffington Post and one of the other attendees was confused as to which young blonde female blogger she was and mistakenly named her as Ali. I don’t think they look much alike, myself.
Also, the Obama campaign did invite some other female bloggers, but only one showed up.
See:
http://thegarance.com/archives/595
and
http://thegarance.com/archives/598
BearCountry @ 49
Hmmm. Malkin, Althouse, and who else?
Jane Hamsher @ 36
I’m pissed too. You are one of my “everyday heros”…go get ‘em!
Funny, I thought I came here because it was the best site to get quality information and analysis on the Plame betrayal and the subsequent Libby prosecution. I had no idea that the reason I was drawn to this blog was because it was about “female issues”, so nice so these folks to tell me this, otherwise I would have continued in my misperception that I came here for solid political analysis and legal analysis on an issue of a fundamental national/international security nature.
Good for you Jane in writing this, especially since in my experience most of the really solid American political writers online that I have enjoyed were women, perhaps because instead of being in thrall to testosterone and macho posing they were more interested in substantive thinking. Whatever the reasons why this is I find the idea that women are not in the same class as male bloggers in the progressive blogosphere incredibly offensive as well as flat out wrong.
jane and christy, as far as i can see, the two most influential people in all of blogdom
this includes kos as far as I can see, the commentors here are quite active
the lake speaks on behalf of America, not on behalf of bloggers or liberals, on behalf of the vast majority of Americans
You “guys” have one of the BEST blogs out there. THE BEST when it comes to Plame/Libby.
1. I’m a little confused. Are Ms. Goodman & Erbe considered to be “liberal”?
2. What does “SCLM” mean?
3. Ok, I understand that Goodman & Erbe have misreported a matter. So….fight back? Perhaps research their other writings and shows to demonstrate on-going, continuing inaccuracies in a host of other matters? Or, are these stories on blog demographics more of an abberation for these 2 women?
Ghostman
JH @ 36
Jane, it sucks that people are collaborating: I say call names.
Ghostman @ 57
SCLM=So Called Liberal Media
Garance Franke-Ruta @ 51
So: who was invited and didn’t go? Did they not go because they’d be thought “in the tank” for Obama? And what’s up with secret blogger meetings with presidential candidates anyway? Is this really the new, open, twenty-first century media we want?
dakine01 @ 59
okie dokie. Thank you.
Ghostman
The Erbe-Goodman axis of faulty retrieval irks me a lot. Of the ten blogs I go to and relate to the most:
fdl
next hurrah
daily kos
panda’s thumb
majikthise
tpmmuckraker
raw story
down with tyranny
Huffington Post
hullabaloo
- half are run by women, and many of the most insightful articles at kos and TPMMuckraker (like the wonderful Laura McGann!) are by women. As I said here last week, I’m a fairly gruff and tough Alaskan outdoors male, who cannot thank the women at these sites enough for all I’ve learned from their articles, comments, insights and wisdom.
By the way, Tara Setmayer is actually a Republican Strategist.
Her blogger page:
She has also appeared on many national television shows including Fox News Channel’s The O’Reilly Factor, Hannity & Colmes Show, Fox & Friends, ABC’s 20/20, Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher, HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher, CNN’s American Morning, Talk Back Live, Newsnight w/Aaron Brown, Paula Zahn, Inside Politics Weekend, CNN International and Anderson Cooper, America’s Black Forum, Black Entertainment Television’s BET Tonight with Tavis Smiley, America’s Voice Youngbloods, and C-SPAN.
Feminizing John Edwards, calling Hillary Clinton tough, sniffing Fred Thompson’s Aqua Velva, ignoring woman bloggers: all part and parcel of TradMed’s sick and twisted relationship with truth, gender, and the American way.
Barbara@50 barbara @ 50
“Spotlight”
Gotta run. Be back later. This blog rules!
What a great post. Hope you pull a rant like that if you can maybe actually get booked on an ‘expert’ teevee panel that discusses blogs someday.
Unfortunately, I think Teddy San Fran and Bear Country and others are correct. Corporate media is basically a fraud now. Their motives are obscure, but revolve around some mix of corporate political positioning, attempts to form mass opinion, and show business. Some futile chase after dream demographics for advertiser dollars, putting on a feel good show to keep them tuned in until the ball game starts, corporate butt kissing so they can be with the inside bigshots for the next round of crony capitalist media give-aways? Who knows exactly what. It aint info and it aint coherent thought, that’s for sure.
My only suggestion is as always, get the jerks to show the URLs on national teevee. The more outrageous the lies, the more important to show the URLs.
I notice that Matt Yglesias (sp?) is featuring food shots again. He has the best food pictures on the internet. Others try, but the color is off, or it looks yucky. So, is Yglesias focusing on women’s issues now? And is he the best women’s blogger out there. And then there were the valuable Gilliard BBQ tips.
Well, it will do no good to argue, the pundits will dig up an old FDL recipe thread and call you a miserable liar and hypocrite. So, only solution is laugh at them (I think the audience is, anyway) and make them show the URL.
puppethead @ 16
I know I came here because of two reasons. The Plame investiagation and the Lamont/HoJo race. Being a former CT resident, I know what a fraud HoJo is. I was glad we didn’t let HoJo get go unchallenged. Was it disappointing? Sure. But we learned our lesson. I love what Jane does here. Ellen Goodman and Bonnie Erbe can go pound sand. Like Pollack and O’Hanlon, none of the four know anything about what they speak of.
Help me here. It seems to me that FDL is more than a Blog. I see lots of sites that are a forum the “owners” and the discussions are more secondary. FDL provides a framework but also fosters this incredible dialogue.
TeddySanFran @ 64
Tweety would crap his pants in the presence of someone like Jane. Better yet, remember that scene from “Gladiator”? The first match in the far off place Russell Crowe has. Where that one guy is so scared that he pisses himself? That guy is Tweety.
I’ve written to Ellen Goodman, whose columns I often like, but not this time! I asked if she might not be a bit threatened…?
Jane on Sam Seder
I’m listening so I dont know if this has been mentioned
Speaking of TV, I watche that Meet the Face show today. First time I watched one o’ them national press talkies in long while.
I think Ford threw some low blows. He pulled an OReilly on supposed anti-Semetic comments on Daily Kos. I think Markos had exactly the correct response -too bad it was almost lost in cross talk.
Ford misrepresented the DLC. After Clinton, its main problem was that its only significant moves were to cave at every challenge. The GOP and corporate media would move the goal posts right several football fields and the DLC would scurry along. Like one of them bugs that keeps futilely doing the same thing over and over if you keep re-arranging its nest.
I also noticed Mr Russert had better things to do today. I will give Ford credit in actually engaging in substantive discussion of actual issues. Both Ford and Kos looked very good compared to the rest of the show. Interesting that the empty gasbag panel and the host rushed away from the interview as fast as they could. It was kind of funny to watch them breathlessly rush on to the boring and tired political horse race stuff. You would think that they might spend a minute discussing the big historical blog-mainstream battle, since they bloviate about its signficiance so much. But, you know, if they discussed the Ford and Markos debate, then they would be forcd to talk about something, rather than nothing. Which was I gues out of any consideration from the get go.
After Ford and Markos, the panelists looked like idiots, IMHO.
They’re just scared. This is what any form of Power does when someone or something challenges or shows even a promise of challenging the status quo.
It’s why they make fun of John Edward’s hair and make sure to make him seem small and weak. If he wins this next election,the Power is gonna have to pay back some of what they stole. Of course they’re gonna try to trash anyone with a populist or progressive message.
It’s why they made fun of Al Gore and made him out to be boring,morose,and all”earth tone-y”. Al may be an”establishment”kinda guy,but he’s not a heartless prick,like most other people in Power.
It’s why they’re trying like hell to pick Hillary for us as the Dem candidate,to make her seem palatable to the masses.Then,that same nasty machine that is STILL blaming Bill for everything will gear up,ramp up and it’ll be Whitewater,Vince Foster and god knows what else all over again. While whoever the GOP nominates gets a pass.
If “the media”can convince the majority of Americans that blogs aren’t to be trusted,for whatever reason,the hope is that people won’t check for themselves. I find myself forgetting sometimes,that even though alot of people read political and news centered blogs,it’s still a really small portion of the country as a whole. This is just another attempt to stifle curiosity and discussion.
Hi Jane,
It would be almost comforting if the phenomenon you are witnessing were sexism. The alternative, which correlates with so much of what we’ve seen, is that this is the standard of reporting that is considered professional among mainstream journalists. And what is the standard? Apparently it’s to say print what the reporters and journalist think the public will be, i.e., to reinforce prejudices, stereotypes, and conventional wisdom, so long as there are no powerful instutions that might be offended.
God, these people piss me off.
wesgpc @ 73
What did you make of it when Ford slipped in the fact that “abortions were reduced” under the Clinton administrations?
Speaking of identity on the internet, I kind of miss when I didn’t know what Digby was. A women? a nerdy guy? a hairy, fat, but intellectual dockworker who could beat up the biggest scariest wingnuts who wanted to fight? A collective? A mysterious force beyond our ken?
Yep. First and last, everyday, and a lot of in between too.
In fact I was just thinking, for the thousandth time, of the great service FDL provides – the top notch analysis, live blogging, commentary, information and community. I was in the dark, groping to find like minded people in a world dominated by Survivor fans before I stumbled on to Jane at HuffPo.
Thank you Jane, you’re a national treasure. Christy, you too.
I was always mystified as to why, during and after the Libby trial, where FDL got copious amounts of publicity for the non-stop liveblogging and general in-depth knowledge of the case, there was no uptick in advertising.
If you’ve got a site that even the MSM admits in print is getting a shitload of traffic – including from the MSM itself – why aren’t advertisers signing on?
wesgpc @ 77
She’s still a mysterious force beyond our ken.
My friend Kathi, who does freelance video tech work, sometimes works on “To The Contrary,” and always comes home ranting afterwards, because it’s uniformly awful. Just so ya know.
This could backfire. Imagine you are a middle aged white male, displeased with this administration, but thinking sites like KOS are Too Lefty Liberal. Then the MSM tells you they are mostly middle aged white males.
raven @ 69
nail on the head raven, no matter which blogs I read, this is the only one where you can count on insight and information in from the commentaters
I also get the idea that my insight is appreciated and I come here to vent, to pontificate
sometimes I am certain progressive politicians like pelosi and feingold read us here because they take our thoughts and you see them almost verbatum in an interview
this is what we are here for and we feel like we have value
I see nothing close on other blogs
raven @ 76
I commented at some length on the accusations of anti-semitism being leveled at anti-war people earlier today (something that they did also at the outset of the Iraq war) and is beyond disgusting. That Ford has picked this up means that the DLC sees this as a hitting point against progressives in the lead up to more surge and possibly Iran bombing to come.
On abortion, Ford is right. Abortions go UP when people don’t have money – and the rates are highest in states with the highest poverty rates. The push against birth control in the rethug years hasn’t helped either – to say nothing of the ring-thingy idiocy.
Hi all-
Silly question:
How is it known whether or not more men or women visit a blog given the many unisex handles?
perris @ 83
Thanks, I thought my comment was being ignored because I am a male! :)
My letter to Ellen Goodman:
Dear Ms. Goodman:
Sitting on my shelf is a copy of Value Judgments that I have read more than once. I tend to agree with your opinions, and I admire your skill as a writer. You are a columnist who addresses issues that I care about, and I I usually feel like you “get it.”
You, however, don’t seem to “get it” about blogging. It seems you think that women bloggers are all but nonexistent. Have you ever actually logged onto Firedoglake? Have you heard of a blogger named Digby? How about Marcy Wheeler at The Next Hurrah? (BTW, Marcy did a far better job than any MSM journalist covering the Libby trial.) Do you know that Daily Kos has lots of diaries written by women? Do you know who Susan Gardner is? Ever heard of a blogger named Ariana Huffington….do you think she’s a guy?
If you were to spend a little bit of time with the bloggers listed above, you might learn something. Until then, you really shouldn’t write columns on subjects you know nothing about.
Milan River @ 85
I was thinking to myself I wonder how many of the people I read here at the lake are women and how many are men.
impossible to tell unless the handle is gender specific
Milan River @ 85
yea!
I think Markos ought to have challenged Ford to give an example of KOS’s anit-semitism, not just said “That’s untrue”. Or at least said “That is a LIE”
raven says August 12th, 2007 at 1:26 pm: re abortion
I don’t know what to make of some of Ford’s comments. I was focusing on what they would say about Iraq and foreign policy, which I think is one of the DLC’s biggest problems. And I was shocked by some Ford’s lower blows, and his egredious misreprentation of the DLC position regarding some of the victorious Democratic candidates in the last election. And, frankly, I have let my history slip on some issues, since I have been focusing on Iraq lately. Some for Ford’s comments didn’t sound right to me.
I want to read an analysis of the show, since my facts are weak on some of what Ford said. Gosh, you’re not saying that nice Mr. Ford might have not been not 100% straightforward, are you? I would be shocked! Shocked!
The only low blow I saw from Markos, was when he kept mentioning the fact that if Ford had listened to the blogosphere, he would be a Senator now. Which seemed a little mean after the third or fourth time. It was probably true, but still a little mean.
You know what is really incredibly sloppy and ignorant about Ellen Goodman’s article in the Boston Globe?
That she couldn’t be bothered to read another, earlier Boston Globe article showing women have NOT been a minority for some time now.
Or that her useless editorial staff didn’t bother to catch this — or deliberately chose not to.
This article has some interesting stuff about anonymity and sockpuppeting.
[Mod Note; in the future, a synopsis and a link avoid potential copyright issues. Thanks.]
By the way, gang:
SPOTLIGHT.
Use it.
wesgpc @ 91
Sorry, I left him when he started all that Jesus shit. . .can’t deal with it. I respect everyone’s spirituality but I don’t want to hear about it.
And two more comments:
1) the long comment rather derails discussion about the content of the post. Links are shorter and more effective.
2) quoting in full an entire piece could be seen as misuse of copyrighted material; please link to source or provide snipped extracts only.
Richmond says August 12th, 2007 at 1:32 pm; Re charge of anti-Semitism:
If the DLC thinks another war is a good approach to triangulate or curry favor with anything that could be called a moderate center, or majority of the US population, I think they are nuts.
I don’t think anyone can know the public reaction to military action against or inside Iran. Might be rally of support for the warnuts, or it might be political revolt against endless and pointless war. Does anyone here think they know. I think the public would support an attack against some Iran associated grou inside Iraq. But what they would think about starting a new front against another coutnry, I have no idea.
I think it would be a ghastly idea in every way, of course.
If DLC thinks that way, best thing is to try to get the whole thing shut down somehow.
My bad, after I saw the Sondheim post I thought it was ok on Sunday!
Ok, I will try spotlight. You have no idea how I can mess up these internet gizmos, but this is the perfect post for it.
wesgpc @ 99
Also, the Quagmire post with the Cheney video.
Fozzetti @ 90
I disagree. When you’re hit with a bullshit argument, it’s best to just say “that’s not true” and move on. Since it’s BS, it requires no effort to make it up, and if you take the time to refute every one, you’ll spend a lot of effort going down that rathole, and if you succeed, they can just make up another one.
To fight BS, hit back hard on the tactic, but not on the substance, because by definition there isn’t any real substance there.
snowbird42 @ 72
Thanks!
Rayne @ 92
Goodman will cite the Fred Hiatt-like firewall between editorial and reporting at the Boston Globe which, like at the WaPo, prevents editorialists from even reading, let alone citing, facts from the reported side of the paper.
Editorialists do their own reporting, or none at all, before opining.
It’s happening again. We’ve been here before. But this will not happen without a solid fight.
We must fight. I’ll find Ellen Goodman.
Spotlighted. This is highly constructive commentary — these folks really need to be called on their BS. Thanks as ever Jane.
FDL is a blog about women’s issues?
Like the economy, rule of law, corporate welfare, lobbyists influence on government, job safety, immigration, government corruption, neglected infrastructure and Habeas Corpus?
Like government accountability, civic responsibility, FISA, energy legislation, fiscal responsibility, deficit spending and the wars in Irag and Afganistan?
All topics discussed here, and that’s just since last Monday morning.
Richmond @ 84
The right wing doesn’t care about reducing abortion, they care about punishing sex. The want abortion and birth control outlawed so that women can’t have sex without suffering the appropriate punishment — pregnancy. In their sick and convoluted way, they think this will force them to behave in a “moral” manner. (Oh, and take their proper place being subservient to men, too.)
I just got on. I’m going back up top to read the comments and I know the book salon is coming, but this cannot go unchallenged.
Hey Jane and Everyone!
Have you seen this video yet? It’s a must see!
http://suzieqq.wordpress.com/2…..-quagmire/
I have heard both Tucker and Morning Joe (both pugs I believe) make fun of bloggers in general. Hearing them do so made me think they are having a difficult time with any changing power structure facilitated by the net and bloggers.
Also, given MSMs dismissal of women blogging today- it reminded me of ‘the church’- centuries ago dismissing and subjugating women and its fear of women’s perseverance.
There are more women than men in America. I’ll bet more women vote than men. I think women spend more of the household income than men. Advertisers are not using their assets well in dismissing any blog that they assume has a high percentage of women hitting there.
wangdangdoodle @ 106
Hey. I’m a woman, and these are issues with me. Of course, these are also issues with the male members of my household, too. What is it with this kind of segregation, the Taliban?
Ignoring women bloggers is a symptom of what ails 99% of so-called “journalists”: not willing to do real journalism (i.e. research, investigation, etc.) and all-too-willing to play stenographer for whatever enitity chooses to manipulate the press. How difficult would it have been to find prominent female bloggers? How much reading or work would it have taken to know FDL is not a blog about “women’s issues”?
These hacks are lazy, willfully ignorant, and foundationally dishonest. If BushCo has done a tremendous job of shredding the constitution, the press has been equally as guilty by undermining the spirit and intent of the first amendment.
Forget the lawyers, let’s kill all the journalists.
Book salon upstairs!
raven @ 98
Sorry, raven, but the topic of Jane’s post obviously gets her goat — and it pisses the sh*t out of me, too. While we’re a freewheeling bunch most of the time popping other topics in threads frequently, there are times when the content of a comment that is either off-topic or overlong can derail an important conversation.
Perhaps you’re not aware of the fact that for at least five f*cking long years there has been this on-going string of “Where are the women bloggers?” articles in the mainstream media. It has got to stop, and we’re not going to get it to stop unless we can have a coherent discussion about why it persists, who and what is behind it, and how the hell we are going to put an end to it.
Women represent a MAJORITY in this country as well as in the world. We have taken our rightful place as a majority of internet users here in the U.S. within the last year or two. We have been a majority of the bloggers for more than several years.
And yet every f*cking quarter we have reports that say (not ask) the same stupid question: Where are the women bloggers?
This, in spite of a convention in Chicago the week before YearlyKos.
The media couldn’t find a f*cking female blogger if it came up and slapped them with laptop along side their collective heads. Why the hell is that?
And why the hell can’t we have one discussion about it without all the side chatter and derailment, I might add? Do our questions and opinions not count????
Argghhh…and any time now somebody will come along and tell me I’m being shrill. They will be the one wearing an HP dv4000 along side their head in short order.
New thread upstairs…
I meant to put a link there; BlogHer had its 3rd annual convention.
BlogHer as a group was formed to answer this stupid, recurring question, Where are the women bloggers?
They formed their own organization and a web community, have conventions, and STILL the mainstream media can’t find them.
I took pictures at YearlyKos that clearly show the percentages of women; I know the media’s cameras caught the same thing. What the hell is so f*cking difficult about this? Do we have to send engraved invitations baited with cocktail wienies and quail wings, or what?
edit: sangemon, the new thread upstairs is the Book Salon. All other non-Book Salon discussion should remain here or in the next new non-Book Salon thread.
richmond at 84 says-”On abortion, Ford is right. Abortions go UP when people don’t have money – and the rates are highest in states with the highest poverty rates. The push against birth control in the rethug years hasn’t helped either – to say nothing of the ring-thingy idiocy.”
ummmmmmm, they also have less access and money for birth control, so, i wouldn’t base your theory on that completely…….
Women in TradMed would rather not see, or illustrate for their readers, the presence of women bloggers in order to retain their “monopoly” on the distaff side of the discourse. “We’re the only women in media, listen to us! Do not seek out other female voices — we’ve looked, and there certainly are none in the blogosphere!”
What’s that expression about a person not seeing what her paycheck depends on her not seeing? This seems a rather perfect example of that to me. For every reader Ellen Goodman loses to better, diverse voices in the blogosphere, her little column is less relevant and less valuable to the Boston Globe and her syndicators. Until her column is simply unread and gone, because everyone has left to read the woman bloggers, of which there are many.
Surely Ellen sees that possibility and is influenced by it.
Dear Jane,
You have all done it to me again. Well, not you exactly, I’ve done it to myself. In 1955, listening to 1010 WINS out of NYC, I was really getting into the new music. With no TV, I was just a listener, with no idea what the performers looked like. I loved it all! Then one day I saw American Bandstand, and discovered that not all the musicians were white like me. Please forgive me, but in Greenwich Connecticut, there weren’t a whole lot of folks who weren’t; at the age of 10, that was my world. I still loved the music, though.
Fast forward a bunch of years, and I have a few blogs that I connect to once or twice a day. (FDL is tied for first with Josh Marshal). And, while I did notice a female name here and there (and just professed my love for TRex, after her brilliant vacuum post) I am just gobsmacked to think that anyone could dismiss FDL and your journalism as limited to “women’s issues.” I must have missed that in your Libby trial coverage. It never occurred to me that you all were anything less that thoughtful, perceptive and astute journalists.
Perhaps I should change my name to “robert the naive,” but I just don’t see how your gender alters the quality of your work. God knows, mine doesn’t seem to protect me from being a slow learner.
Please keep doing what you do so well.
R
And why the hell can’t we have one discussion about it without all the side chatter and derailment, I might add? Do our questions and opinions not count????
Argghhh…and any time now somebody will come along and tell me I’m being shrill. They will be the one wearing an HP dv4000 along side their head in short order.
I’m sorry the post was too long. Someone posted a question about how the gender of FDL participants was determined and I thought that this part of the article
was relevant to the conversation. I apologize if the “side chatter” was offensive. There are often multiple conversations going on here I apparently I am too insensitive to know when it not cool to be exactly on topic.
They are indeed scared. On C-SPAN this am was the “The Future of News” forum described below. This is must see peer to peer discussion of trends in the various forms of media. Talked about finances, ability to support newsrooms and reporters, stats and trends on users of each medium (the known and unknown), how the web can be used including how the press can wring a survival profit from the Web. This really is must-see TV and a clear clarion call to those who aren’t focused on Net Neutrality. It’s clear that this group, at least, is convinced that pay premium access is their best hope for survival — seems their web advertising is not generating satisfactory revenue. I’ll call c-span and encourage them to repeat this show.
No idea whether or not it’s a repeat. It does not show up on their sched for tonight (but sched is unreliable).
IMO, the factor of ambiguous “handles” on the internet being a long standing tradition held over from usenet (particularly for women), is never mentioned by the MSM, but certainly must affect everyone’s stats re: female participation, though not so much maybe the sex of bloggers themselves (if Digby is singular).
———— FORUM
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication Annual Convention
Radio-Television Journalism and Media Management and Economics Divisions
“The Future of News” at the Annual Convention, which was held in the Renaissance Washington, D.C. Hotel. Aug 9
Moderating/Presiding: Robert Papper, Ball State Panelists: Scott Bosley, executive director, ASNE Barbara Cochran, executive director, RTNDA Bob Garfield, host, “On the Media” Tom Petner, Temple Tom Rosenstiel, Project for Excellence in Journalism
Rayne, you’d ruin that poor laptop just to get some bozo’s attention? I’m shocked, shocked, I tell you! ;)
(I’d probably use my fifteen-pound-contents purse. Really effective, and probably no obvious marks left.)
Um, I went to Yearly Kos for one day only — a white female who couldn’t afford to go for more. And guess what: I was pleasantly surprised by how many women were there, and how many persons of color I saw …. I expected it to be more male and more white than it actually was. And I think the MSM attacking YK for being white and male are just ridiculous: they saw only what they wanted to see, not what was actually there. It baffles me: Markos himself isn’t exactly white … and he’s the figurehead for the movement.
I saw the line about FDL being a blog about “women’s issues” and laughed out loud … and he managed to write that in the same sentence where he mentioned the liveblogging at the Libby trial … which makes the Scooter Libby Trial a “women’s issue,” right?
Oh, and the other thing that gets my goat is the whole trope about how the blogsphere is white and male … like the MSM isn’t? Someone pointed out the relative numbers of white men to women and persons of color on the Globe board … and it wasn’t pretty (I believe it was that 2 of 6 are women … OH NO! How could that be? Why isn’t the Globe Board of Editors more representative of those they serve?) Pot, meet Kettle.
teddy at 118 says-”Women in TradMed would rather not see, or illustrate for their readers, the presence of women bloggers in order to retain their “monopoly” on the distaff side of the discourse. “We’re the only women in media, listen to us! Do not seek out other female voices — we’ve looked, and there certainly are none in the blogosphere!”
What’s that expression about a person not seeing what her paycheck depends on her not seeing? This seems a rather perfect example of that to me. For every reader Ellen Goodman loses to better, diverse voices in the blogosphere, her little column is less relevant and less valuable to the Boston Globe and her syndicators. Until her column is simply unread and gone, because everyone has left to read the woman bloggers, of which there are many.
Surely Ellen sees that possibility and is influenced by it.”
that’s it, teddy, that’s how i look at it, too…….and i was also thinking that when you get a pass to the front of the line, you don’t necessarily want those you were in line with also getting a pass to the front……..i would, i would say more the merrier, but some white males and some females would prefer to be ‘the special ones’ and will do anything they can to knock down the competition…….
but i think whomever is doing the best job in the most pure sense will win in the end…….and we know who that is, it is evident in their work, in the product…and it is also evident is what has grown from it…and that will rise to the top……..the true essence of something is what resonates.
robert at 119 says in part-”(and just professed my love for TRex, after her brilliant vacuum post)”
ummmmmm, robert, trex is a gay man…….a highly intelligent, sensitive, insightful gay man.
and i will close with something else you said, because it then made me laugh out loud, it was soo funny considering the trex comment-
“Perhaps I should change my name to “robert the naive,” but I just don’t see how your gender alters the quality of your work. God knows, mine doesn’t seem to protect me from being a slow learner.”
taken after the trex thing, that was precious and is going in my hall of fame……..you made my day robert!
Well, that says all I need to know about who Obama’s handlers value. OTOH, the only time I have EVER seen a post by Hillary Clinton was right here on Firedoglake. THAT tells me a lot about her. She knows she needs women to win and she knew where to find them. Someone on her campaign is paying attention.
Keep up the good work, Jane. WE know you’re here and couldn’t get along without FDL.
raven at 120 says-”
was relevant to the conversation. I apologize if the “side chatter” was offensive. There are often multiple conversations going on here I apparently I am too insensitive to know when it not cool to be exactly on topic.”
that’s the part of your post i honed in on raven, thought it was on topic……..
and i had been looking for an article about the whole foods incident, was talking about it with a very republican friend last night…….i was gently trying to bring out unethical behaviors as a subject, she’s coming around……
so, thanks for the article, i emailed it to her……
dmac @ 128
Sheeesh, now I’m even more confused. First I’m getting a laptop or purse upside my head and now I’m being thanked! Gotta love dat Lake.
Jane:
Part of it is that women have succeeded in the media, but only by being utter toadys. The spite girls, dowd, judy miller, …
Imagine how bad someone in the second tier must feel as they watch fdl and digby and others do well without kissing ass.
raven at 129 says-”Sheeesh, now I’m even more confused. First I’m getting a laptop or purse upside my head and now I’m being thanked!”
well, raven, as you know, there are just as many kinds of women as there are women………
i sought out the relevant part of your post, others didn’t. because i know you don’t post irrelevant sh@t……..the added bonus was the beginning part which i had been looking for……..but i read further to find the point you were trying to make……..
and jane, i meant to say this the first time you posted this subject-the one way to get noticed in this country for being a woman nowadays is to wear a burka…….
dmac @ 117
My comments were based on statements by women seeking abortions (apparently mostly married with children already) (I read this, probably in the NYT). Clearly money is a factor, but access to abortion clinics for many people is even harder to come by than access to birth control means these days.
dmac @ 131
I appreciated and it wasn’t really Jane jumped anyway. I’m cool with the whole deal because I know I’m not always clear in what I say. It’s been an “issue” for me all my life.
Richmond @ 4
No need to wonder, not only are they trying to discredit the progressive blogs but it is also a lame attempt to create a divide between men and women bloggers. The media whores repeatedly insult our intelligence.
I stumbled across Bonnie Erbe’s show a few months back, and she can be counted on to patronize feminist men and feminist women alike.
Note well: she does it from the same weighted posture as all MSM/PBS talk shows. Two guests from ‘right’ and ‘left,’ for apparent ‘balance.’ The two Repubs I saw aggressively pushed the talking points of the RNC, et al, spinning at every opportunity and hogging as much time as possible. Their affiliation wasn’t fully identified. The two Dems–Pat Schroeder and (IIRC) Patricia Sosa (Clinton official) struggled to make any coherent points, and what they did say didn’t have much import, resonance, or impact.
Overall, they were gnawing on the topic of why men only stay with women because they do all the housework and bring home the bacon. Otherwise, they’d be out the door. Yikes! That h’ain’t been true in all the households I grew up around since 1970.
Congress changing FISA:
Ex post facto
ex post facto adj. Formulated, enacted, or operating retroactively. [Med Lat., from what is done afterwards] Source: AHD
In U.S. Constitutional Law, the definition of what is ex post facto is more limited. The first definition of what exactly constitutes an ex post facto law is found in Calder v Bull (3 US 386 [1798]), in the opinion of Justice Chase:
1st. Every law that makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, criminal; and punishes such action. 2d. Every law that aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed. 3d. Every law that changes the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law annexed to the crime, when committed. 4th. Every law that alters the legal rules of evidence, and receives less, or different, testimony, than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense, in order to convict the offender.
As I understand it, Congress may not pass into law the above.
The warrantless wiretapping was deemed illegal by 2 judges prior to the change.
richmond at 132 says-”My comments were based on statements by women seeking abortions (apparently mostly married with children already) (I read this, probably in the NYT). Clearly money is a factor, but access to abortion clinics for many people is even harder to come by than access to birth control means these day”
i’ll try to keep this short(she wrote after writing it because of all of the things i could write about it)
oh, yeah, i know, was just adding what i said-”ummmmmmm, they also have less access and money for birth control, so, i wouldn’t base your theory on that completely…….” because i thought you were overlooking that part, and didn’t want you to…….access to abortion clinics is a major issue, but access to women’s heathcare and contraceptives is an equally abhorrent problem…….and far more problematic on a daily basis…….without preventative care, the abortion issue enters in……..we won’t even go into pap smears to detect early cancers, etc.
contraception is an issue, a big one……planned parenthood not only provided abortions, but contraception…..and as they’re being wiped out, so it the care that patients received there…….where i live, there is one clinic that provides services on a sliding scale…i don’t know how many counties they cover, but it’s a lot….and it’s in a area that not everyone owns a dependable car……then the cost of the pill, or the shot……not everyone can do it……we are the second poorest county in ohio, healthcare for women is not a priority……so, the kids come…….most around here don’t even have the money for an abortion……
Re: FISA:
Attainder
attainder n. The loss of all civil rights by a person sentenced for a serious crime. [In the context of the Constitution, a Bill of Attainder is meant to mean a bill that has an negative effect on a single person or group (for example, a fine or term of imprisonment). Originally, a Bill of Attainder sentenced an individual to death, though this detail is no longer required to have an enactment be ruled a Bill of Attainder.
raven at 133 says-”I appreciated and it wasn’t really Jane jumped anyway. I’m cool with the whole deal because I know I’m not always clear in what I say. It’s been an “issue” for me all my life.”
you’ve always been crystal clear to me, except for the time you got snippy with christie, but you apologized and made it right………otherwise i wouldn’t have taken on that asshole the other day for you……..hah…..burned his butt……..
man, i’m sure commenting a lot in this thread, not like me…….oh well.
i must be asserting my womanhood, spurred on by jane’s magnificent post………hah.
jane, when someone is doing something first, it always gets a reverberating wave back in their face, then, it defines itself on its own and has a place defined, on its own…….
i was one of the first female telephone installers in the country….talk about a reverberation….then a tester and then, the most taboo, a splicer-someone who works in the cables, really taboo for females….but now it is common to have females working outside for the phone company…….
just a matter of time, and i don’t think it will be too much time at all, you’ve already been laying the foundation for years now……..hang in there, it will come…..it did for me, and it wasn’t pretty getting there………but i did have allies, as you do, and i did have what i needed to get the job done, as you do, and now time has passed and it is an everyday thing. as it will be for you……..
anangryoldbroad @ 74
Another way they minimize Edwards is not to cover him. Here he’s exploring actual policy issues and solutions, but is this on the front page or the Evening News??? Why no, they’ve got much more important things to cover [the “spats” between Hill & Obama, a small step up from the missing blondes].
dmac @ 139
Hang tough dmac!
PS, google donr1 and look at the stuff he said on Huff Post. He needed to be taken on.
raven says-”Hang tough dmac!”
i will, love you, you remind me of someone i worked with…..he told me ‘nam stories…….stuff he didn’t even tell his wife…..we were in a manhole and i was young and openminded..he was in charge of training me for the phone company…he adopted me.
he cut the path for the rest of the garage to accept me……what he told me i wish i didn’t know….he thanked me later for talking to him, said it helped him, i felt honored, like he gave me a present…but it helped me later in life when my neighbor who was a recon guy, green beret, in vietnam had seizures and his wife called me in the middle of the night and he was ‘in vietnam’…he kept repeating they’re gonna kill us all, in this eerie whisper…and i knew how to talk him through it till the emergency people arrived, all because of my coworker….
ends up he had a calcium deposit in his brain, and it took him back to vietnam…….
and am going off to google donr1-will take a while, i’m on dialup….i don’t google except when necessary.
ok raven, i googled donr1……..scary…….and i was right in asking him how old he was….he’s 20.
i was dead on that…..
could you help me with requesting getting the ‘recent posts’ menu back on fdl??????? it makes it much easier to come back to past posts if you’re on dialup, like i am…i used it all the time, and now it’s gone…otherwise, you have to keep muliple windows open, which can lead to embarrasing posts,,,,,,i posted to dr.maryam, and it ended up on tammy faye’s death post……..wow………
dmac @ 144
sure, what would you like me to look up?
markann at hotmail dot com
Catching up from early afternoon, and know this is in EPU land, but so be it. Jane, I’m glad in a weird sense that this issue has hit out in the open. For my entire career, I’ve been in nursing – which isn’t quite legitimate. The public stereotypes nurses as subservient, obedient, kind and compassionate helpmeets. Nurses don’t get any professional respect or mention by the mainstream media. But neither do they get respect and attention by feminists and progressives. The stereotypes run very, very deep. I intentionally use a gender neutral pseudonym, but I don’t make any special attempt to hide my gender. It is what people discover it is. But very, very few readers come to my blog because it is advertised as dealing with professional nursing issues. and those just aren’t deemed important. MaryScott O’Connor came right out and said so on her blog.
So while I’m glad this issue about women and blogging is being addressed, know that some of us have been working in truly very dark alleys where the light of the progressive and feminist communities has not yet reached.
But there is a candle in the window, and the door is always open. On my blog, there is a permanent invitation for people interested in progressive healthcare to blog. Not one person ever responded and accepted it.
My blog is bookmarked on only two or three progressive blogs. I have requested inclusion on several feminist blogrolls – never had a response. I requested advertising from progressive advertisers – no response.
I can’t be the sole person who has been turned away from the very communities in which I wish to support and to be an active member. But I can’t even board the bus, let alone get a seat on it – front or back.
With 90% of my readership coming from wing nuts who write spam and hate mail, I am out of ideas, inspiration and frankly, the motivation to continue. Writing a blog which seems to garner no support and only active hate just isn’t doing anything for me – and I can’t see where it’s helping the progressive or feminist communities since they stay away in droves.
Is there any place for us marginalized and stereotyped bloggers? If so, please let me know where, and if the door will be answered to a knock.
Actually, Jane, your entire premise of this post is faulty. Erbe had a panel without any women bloggers? False. She had me. As (just one) part of my work as the director of Women In Media & News, I run the popular WIMN’s Voices group blog on women and the media, in which dozens of women blog about different aspects of media content, policy and advocacy. I was on the panel as a blogger, a media critic, a feminist non-profit director, and (yes) an attendee of YearlyKos who has a valid critique of the overwhelmingly white and male speaker roster. I never said on the show or anywhere else that no women spoke or were involved, and I believe I actually mentioned FireDogLake on the show (though I was often shouted down during the taping of the show and I haven’t seen it on air yet, so I’m not sure how the segment turned out). But the argument that a few prominent women involved means that there isn’t a gender equity problem is myopic. It’s similar to traditional all-white, all-male corporate boards of directors saying, “We don’t have a diversity problem – we’re crawling with those people” when they have one or two women and/or people of color on a large board. Yes, it’s progress — but it’s not equity.
I’ve read an interview you’ve done – can’t remember for which outlet or blog – where you implied that people who complain of marginalization of women’s voices online are off base because if women were better writers, people would read their blogs more. That implies that there is no institutional discrimination in this culture, and that American culture (online and offline) runs entirely on meritocracy. If only that were true. But clearly, not so much.
Whether we agree or disagree on that point, I do want to encourage you to actually check your facts before you post. I can’t believe the irony of you griping that Erbe’s show ignored you when in fact we did mention your very blog, and complaining that the show included no women bloggers when in fact the guest list included a woman blogger who was at YearlyKos (me). The group blog I write for and manage — WIMN’s Voices — has been around for about a year and a half and has been linked from and discussed on Huffington Post, Feministing, AlterNet/Peek, Echidne of the Snakes, Shakespeare’s Sister/Shakesville, Feministe, Broadsheet/Salon, Women’s Voices for Change, Our Bodies Our Blog, PopPolitics and many others, and has been successful in generating discussion in larger independent and corporate print and broadcast media. That you don’t even know that it exists, or know that I’m a blogger (that you could claim that Erbe’s show included no women bloggers when I was at the damn conference) illustrates my point about marginalization of women writers online.
–Jenn
That you don’t even know that it exists, or know that I’m a blogger (that you could claim that Erbe’s show included no women bloggers when I was at the damn conference) illustrates my point about marginalization of women writers online.
Does it? To me it illustrates that all those women bloggers who you mentioned who are much more well known than you would have been good choices to invite to the panel. Why were you chosen as the sole representative of women bloggers?
Jennifer L. Pozner @ 147
I occasionally change my own oil. I don’t call myself a mechanic.
jane-”I occasionally change my own oil. I don’t call myself a mechanic.”
oh my
Jane, about this:
I occasionally change my own oil. I don’t call myself a mechanic.
Are you seriously implying that just because our blog is only a year and a half old, I’m not a “real” blogger?
Because if that’s true, my friend, you are part of the problem. You’re saying that as a media critic I can’t hold the same critical lens toward online media as I do toward old media, and in particular that my point about the underrepresentation of women’s voices in power circles online is off base because, oh, YOU have a popular blog — but then you’re saying that I’m not actually a blogger because, why? I haven’t been doing it as long as you have?
How long do I have to have been blogging before I can claim to be a “real blogger” in your estimation? Is it totally insignificant that I singlehandedly created a platform for several dozen women to blog who might not have
otherwise? Does it make any difference that in 1996, I was involved in online feminist activism circles and women’s leadership listservs and community discussion groups connecting women all across the country who used the net to advocate against violence, for reproductive justice, against media
consolidation, for clean elections and campaign finance reform and other issues many years before anyone dreamed up the phrase “netroots”? (Do you think you, Markos and Matt Stoller created online activism?)
Or am I simply not allowed to have any sort of critique — and am I not allowed to call myself a “blogger” because you have the trademark on that identity, simply because you’re winning the online popularity contest?
I’m really shocked, Jane, that you’d be so hypocritical in complaining that you
and other women bloggers are supposedly being overlooked (in response to a discussion about how women are actually being overlooked), yet you would say I’m not a blogger. WIMN’s Voices has very healthy traffic. We have dedicated
readers who devour our posts. We generate discussion in the blogosphere. We generate discussion in the media. And we create space for a wide range of diverse women to monitor media. If you think I’m not a blogger simply because I’m critiquing your friends (or because I think it’s great that you have a popular blog and I say that when I talk about blogs, but I also say that attention to a handful of women’s blogs does not equal equity) then you’re
really slow. Which is surprising, considering that you are often a very astute writer.
And, Rootless2, about this:
Does it? To me it illustrates that all those women bloggers who you mentioned who are much more well known than you would have been good choices to invite to the panel. Why were you chosen as the sole representative of women bloggers?
“To The Contrary” is a half-hour public affairs show that runs three segments on air and then one web-only extra feature. This week, one of those topics was about blogging and YearlyKos. Typically, the show features politicians, journalists and leaders of non-profits. I was booked on the show as a media critic and as the head of a women’s media analysis, education and advocacy group — NOT at all as a “the sole representative of women bloggers.” In fact, I was booked for the show about two months ago, and they only chose to include blogging as one of the four segments they discussed a few days ago. It was a coincidence that I was there during the week of this blogging discussion, and it’s a good thing I was because at least they had someone on the show who does, indeed, blog, and who was able to say that there is not any one monolithic way to describe “the blogosphere,” that there are amazing women blogging all over the net, and that people who say there are no women bloggers aren’t really looking for us. Also, to another point: guests on public affairs programs need to be well informed about a wide variety of topics. I wasn’t brought on as a “blogger,” I was brought on as the head of a non-profit that works on media issues. I do happen to know that the show has taped an interview segment with a couple of well known women of the blogosphere, that will air at some point in the near future — hopefully more of these issues will be raised during that show.
–Jenn
As the brits say, Brilliant, Jane!!! thanks for this and for all the support and smart talk you bring to this issue. For those of us who, years and years ago, ripped off our bras at the B of A buildings “heart of the banker” rock in San Francisco then burned them in protest for equal rights and equal pay, you are a beacon of light in a very dark world.
Jennifer L. Pozner @ 151
This is side-tracking into who has “internet street-cred” (net-cred?).
One of the major problems with Erbe’s ‘To the Contrary’ is that it is remarkably weak tea.
So much so that it belies its name. The show I saw acted as though Feminism-for-the-Past-Thirty-Seven-Years simply never existed. It served as a platform to catapult RNC and Heritage Foundation propaganda–and yes, it was propaganda, spun by head PR flacks–in extraordinarily aggressive, agenda-driven, less-than-honest terms.
Frankly, I was shocked Pat Schroeder would let herself be used in such a grotesque manner–and equally shocked at her passivity. The RNC & Heritage Foundation guests were allowed to hog time, drive home agenda-ridden spin points, and frame the debate in partisan, fact-free terms.
The worst aspect: Erbe’s guest had little to do with the actual topic under discussion. The guests were politicians and PR flacks–but not actual experts on women, employment and the workplace. It was like discussing the Mississippi River, but having guests expert in the L.A. River and the Potomac on the show. Or discussing Hurricane Katrina, but only inviting experts on tornados in Ohio and Nebraska. Makes no sense. It’s manipulative and talks around a topic, about a person or point of view, without doing it justice.
JEnn, I can appreciate that you, too, blog. But if you’re a generalist, or happen to be an expert-who-happens-to-blog, you’re fodder for Erbe’s corrosive manipulative media method. I personally don’t see Jane as the only game in town–digby, emptywheel, etc., etc. also man the ramparts [sic]–but. But. If Bonnie Erbe had wanted to address the issue up-front, she would have gone to Jane or emptywheel (etc.) who focus solely on blogging and for whom blogging is central definition of what they do.
They are bloggers whose subject is politics and media, not politicians or media fellows who also happen to blog. There’s a difference. Many may successfully cross-over. George Plimpton, though, was never an NFL player, not really. Jim Lehrer and Walt Frazier, sure they wrote books, but they weren’t/aren’t exactly literary figures.
I haven’t read your stuff, so you may be a fine blogger. But you were used by and complicit in Bonnie Erbie’s method of putting forth a faux meta-debate about a topic, that never honestly dialogues with/grapples with that subject.
Bonnie Erbe objectifies her subjects. They’re not there to engage in the debate. Her guests are there to a) label and define the objects of discussion–and b) to acquiesce to those labels, characterizations, and rhetorical frames. It’s a hit-job, and one that requires participation.
Let’s get away from this “I am too! a blogger!” off-topic juvenile exchange. Sure, you’re a blogger. If you were the media expert you appear to be, you’d’ve glommed onto what Bonnie Erbe was up to and nailed her to the wall, forthwith and posthaste. Erbe’s method is clearly very calculated, but it requires willing participants. If she’d had any interest in getting down to the business of women bloggers, you’d’ve had 3 other women bloggers to keep you company on that show.
I’m an older guy, retired Navy, and I read approximately 150 blogs daily – have been for over three years now. FDL is in my top ten “must reads” every day, and I can honestly say that I could care less if good writing is done by a male or a female. Looking at the blogs I read, the writers/thinkers seem to be pretty evenly divided between male and female.
I will say this: I don’t waste my time on crap writing; I’ve been “sifting and winnowing” whom I read daily over those three years, and FDL has been in my top ten since I discovered the blogs ( pure democracy – I love it ).
Digby, Pandagon, Dooce, Susan G and others at Kos, several female photo blogs, Athenae, Cox, and many more represent some of the best stuff that I read daily. I think you have some jealous MSM critics, also some guys might be pissed that you are getting more traffic than they are. Who knows? Just keep on doing what your crew at FDL has been doing: providing many of us with damn good, insightful and passionate writing on important subjects. My thanks go to all of you.
Jennifer L. Pozner @ 151
No, Jennifer, I don’t think that is what Jane was saying, or not intentionally about you anyway.
But, let’s think about this for a moment, shall we? I was at YearlyKos and there were a lot of women there. But if media reports were any guide, you would think that there were only a handful in an ocean of white men and not only is that demonstrably false, the idea is dangerous. It’s dangerous because it gives the viewing public the idea that the blogosphere on the left is no different than the blogosphere on the right. It makes it look like just another inpenetrable bastion of white male entitlement. And those of us who visit the major left leaning blogs and go to YearlyKos *know* that isn’t true. Why do we want to see that conventional wisdom perpetuated? It will discourage other women and diverse groups from participating and that goes against the goals of the movement.
As for Firedoglake, it would be a huge mistake to pigeonhole it as being a blog for “women’s issues” as I hear it has been described. The coverage of the Libby Trial on FDL is well-known and, in my humble opinion, worthy of a Pulitzer. You can thank Jane for her significant effort to oust Lieberman. She did it for three reasons:1.) He was an insensitive prick about rape victim’s access to the morning after pill, 2.) his support of the war was reprehensible and a thorn in his party’s side and 3.) Jane recognized Lieberman as the Achilles heel in swinging Congress back to the Democrats. if we could damage him, we could emboldened the rest of our candidates. It was phenomenally successful.
Now, I’m sure you blog well. I haven’t read your stuff but if you got to where others feel as though you can legitimately comment on the left blogosphere, that is no small feat, as Jane herself will surely admit.
But, IMHO, Jane’s contribution in the past year has been as significant as kos’s or Josh Marshall’s and yet no one saw fit to contact her? That’s truly bizarre. Those in the know in the left blogosphere are thoroughly confused and consternated about this turn of events. Here you have one of the formost political bloggers who happens to be a woman and all of the major news orgs know her, FDL has a great reputation among them (I know this because I talked to someone who’s wife works for the NYT and they RELIED on FDL for their Libby news) and she’s not invited to the table. In fact, there is a rumor going around the media that people like Jane do not exist. (BTW, everything I just wrote applies to Christy and Marcy and Siun as well)
Then there are the DailyKos contributing editors: McJoan, Miss Laura, Susan G, Georgia 10 and the thousands of other female diarists, including myself. And Ariana Huffington. And To the Contrary does not even think to consider any of us? It’s not there is no one out there and there is a need to fill. It’s that we are here but we are not even on the radar.
I’m sorry Jennifer. You are not yet in FDL’s category. But if you decide at some point in your life after major surgery to come prematurely out of convalescence to cover a major trial and work your butt off for the good of the nation in a turning point Senatorial race, then maybe I will respect your lecturing. Until then, please defer to your betters.
Obviously I can’t speak for the MSM. I would expect them to be sexist and piggish and horrible in every possible way, since they so obviously are like that on TV, shudder. Nor can I say anything about advertising, because I’m not doing that.
I happen to be white and male. Nevertheless, since I started my site in 2003 I have always had plenty of females in my weblog links. I just checked, and right now it’s six females out of fifteen links, not counting Boing Boing — which I actually think is kind of sexist — because it’s not political. But even if you count Boing Boing Newsfare has six women out of sixteen links, or 38 percent. (Digby, um, recently improved my statistics. I always thought she was male, probably because of the blog’s name and the photo of, well, Peter Finch. Thank you, Digby, for turning out to be female.)
More importantly, I admire the female bloggers. They do such a great job, and are so dedicated. I am in awe of FDL.
Jane:
Do you really think there is a sexist problem with the blogosphere?I understand that bloggers access to MSM may be biased in regards tot he bloggters sex but really who gives a damn about that. This medium is about NOT PLAYING THEIR GAME and you really don’t need access to MSM to “improve” your blog. I read maybe a dozen of or so blogs everyday and I could give a shit about the sex of the bloggers. Its the accuracy and uncensored, unspun content that I read for, thats why I’m a Pup! I read Digby as much now as I did when I had no idea of what her sex was. ITS NOT AN ISSUE! Please don’t judge (or bellyache) about your access to MSM. the more bloggers appear on MSM the weaker their credibilty! We are not about them, we are about YOU and US!
Keep on keepin’ on!
… but the fact that this group was almost exclusively men is more reflective of the fact that those “serious” institutions are comprised mostly of men. And those people do get support in a way that we women in the blogosphere absolutely do not. Much like advertisers who think we’re not “serious,” the organizations that support, promote and sustain men — which are completely external to the blogosphere — are a much bigger problem than Duncan or Markos’s linking habits.
I have to disagree, Jane. What we are seeing replicated in the blogosphere is the same wagon circling that has been a staple of MSM since it’s inception. It’s not an accident that even though some of the top blogs are “women’s blogs” the people being courted by MSM and advertisers are predominately male bloggers.
That is exactly what Jenn Pozner was pointing out — which makes your comment to her “I occasionally change my own oil. I don’t call myself a mechanic.” really annoying. Come on Jane, stop playing the divide and conquer game — no one wins when we do that.
I’ve been a full time feminist activist for more than 15 years, and I first heard about Jenn’s work more than a decade ago. You have a great blog, but it only came to my attention a couple of years ago. I think Jenn’s contribution deserves more than “I occasionally change my own oil …”
And since you brought up the topic of “linking habits,” I do think it’s a problem that the “Big Boys of Blogging” decided to purge their blogrolls, and are mostly promoting each other. Yes, they have a few women on their blogroll, but it’s primarily the same circle jerk that women and people of color have had to deal with since … well … forever. If these guys are your friends then call them on their bad behavior and demand that they model the behavior we claim we want as a progressive movement.
BAC
BAC @ 158
Name one. And feel free to back it up with statistics.
BAC @ 158
I think *you* miss the point. The point is not that Jane or FDL is feminist. The point is that Jane and FDL and many other female bloggers are political. Their feminism is what got them there but it is their insight and intelligence in the political realm that sets them apart from the Jen Poznar’s of the world. Jane is not simply a feminist writer or blogger. Jane has rightfully earned her place with the rest of the left blogosphere. This is not just a man’s world and Jane is not simply hosting a salon. She is a warrior like Markos and Atrios and Josh. She belongs in a genderless category but one that recognizes that women, a whole bunch of them, like Disby and Marcy and Amanda, belong. Jen Poznar is in a different category. She is not a pioneer of the medium. Jane is.
See the difference?
ok, whatever.
dmac @ 126
Ahhh Dmac, humor at my expense is nothing new to me. I’m glad you got a laugh, and honored to be in your archives.
As for TRex, I’ll change the pronoun and apologize to him for my error, but nothing else changes. FDL is an intelligent and caring place, and I am always happy to be here.
R
nomolos @ 5
knuckle sandwich?
To Jane and portia.vz:
If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.
BAC
gee…you’re a woman??? I just assumed cos you kind of single-handedly blogged the scooter libby affair, that, that you were a guy. I guess I’ll have to stop reading all you’re stuff now…sorry…
Alex @ 164
Translation: men are one-handed typists.
Boy this thread takes a lickin and keeps on tickin!
BAC @ 163
You have made an assertion that you have failed to back up. Ad hominum attacks and mau-mauing people for being “sexists” do not take the place of facts. I think it’s incumbent on you to provide some specifics or withdraw your allegation and apologize to all involved.
I don’t know how you have a media panel on women in the blogosphere with no actual woman bloggers
The same way you have a “war President” who’s never actually, you know, been to war.
Wow sounds like alot of whining to me. If you have something of substance to say that has true meaning…your blog will have value. If you are not part of the solution your part of the problem. Often I wonder why bloggers blog…there are real jobs out there where whining is welcomed.
Obewan
Jesus fucking christ. Are you serious? Did I just read a thread wherein people lambasted a feminist blogger for not being “good enough”?
Somebody alert Althouse…
[CHS notes: No need to alert anyone. I have to say, taking a condescending tone with someone in the comments is not appropriate. Whether Jane and I work our butts off is beside the point. And that “betters” crap really has to stop. Thanks.]
Pozner and I have both been blogging about this issue. While I don’t have the profile of being the executive director of an institute, I am a woman political blogger. If Erbe needs another guest, I’m available and not too far from her studios!