It's been building over the past couple of months, as we waded through endless cable talk shows about Obama's "pastor problem" and his "bitter" remarks and Hillary's Kosovo claims. Gradually, it's become clear to just about everyone that the American media aren't informing them or helping to sort through difficult issues in the course of this presidential campaign, and are instead focusing on the trivial, the silly, the truly insignificant, as though these kinds of effluvia constitute the reasons why we vote.
And we've had enough.
This trivialization of American political discourse reached a real nadir last night with ABC's handling of the Democratic presidential debate. The gossipy, absurd nature of the questions in the first hour were so obvious that the audience reacted loudly -- not to the candidates themselves, but to the questioners.
That booing you heard last night, ABC? It was for you.
Bad enough that the questions were trivial -- even more notable was that it seemed as though they had been concocted by right-wing talk-show hosts, since they all were built out of right-wing talking points. And well, whaddya know?
Hannity asked George what kinds of questions they'll be asking at the debate tomorrow and they discussed a few things. When Hannity asked about the first question below about Ayers and whether George had plans to ask such a question, George replied, "Well, I'm taking notes now Sean." It did actually sound like he was pausing to take notes.
There's no small irony in Sean Hannity demanding to know about Obama's supposed unsavory connections to people who once were radical terrorists. Sean Hannity, the onetime friend of Hal Turner.
Turner, you'll recall, has made something of an ugly name for himself in recent years with his frequent calls for the assassination of various figures, including judges overseeing the cases of white supremacists and various members of Congress. Max Blumenthal has all the details. And of course, it's always fun to watch Hannity lie and scramble for cover whenever Turner's name gets brought up on his show.
But Hannity is only one of many serial prevaricators working the dark mines of TV broadcasting these days. Indeed, it's become clear that they're all just one big circle-jerk, handling tips from one another and passing them along like they were nectar from heaven itself.
The rest of us, however, have a decidedly different view of the proceedings. And until it improves, we're going to keep booing.
Login Here
Spotlight



Support this site!
Keep
up with news
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search


RSS/XML Feed
I’m glad I missed this “debate.”
SO?
Damn, so close.
boooooooo
Seems condescending and elitist to laugh at the crowd booing you, no?
HRC’s new foreign policy of unilateral and undeclared war on behalf of Israel has me more worried than any other thing she’s said this silly season. Was that just one giant pander to AIPAC, or was there something there I missed besides “nuke’em til they glow”?
Worst.Debate.Ever. the Guardian
Boo on ABC..boycott them and boycott the products they sell.
Obama and Hillary can legitimately respond to any trivial “debate” question by reframing it, “Since you won’t ask a substantive question, I’ll talk about something important to voters’ lives…”
Calling out the chattering class on their inanity can only help a candidate, I beleive.
This shit reminds me of the joke about congressional hearings. Paraphrasing -
“GIBSON: But, enough about you, Senator, let’s focus on me.”
you can bet Charles Wanky McWankington is telling the staff -
‘we must be doing something right with this kind of firestorm out there’
We wish.
But, yeah.
These media superstars won’t allow it. Hugh in the previous thead nailed it when he said(in part)
The Democratic Leadership needs to take both Clinton and Obama out, around, and behind the outhouse in order to deliver an unvarnished attention grabber.
Perhaps, the start of this quiet conversation should commence with “The Democrats have delivered Social Security and Medicare to you. What have the Republicans delivered to you?”
If so, then any debate would be focused on a pleasant and intelligent conversation. Sadly, we are never prepared for a debated designed as an “unmitigated disaster” as stated as an understatement.
that our media and political discourse has deteriorated to this is sad and truly lends creedence to the belief (by folks outside the country) that americans are dumb.
I haven’t watched ABC in years. The problem is, they won’t know I’m boycotting them now.
Here’s what someone posted at The Guardian:
If there is ever another debate on ABC,and I hope there will never be one…I very much hope there are audience members with very soft, ripe, mushy tomatoes and very good arms.
I prefer “uninformed” or “misled” to dumb.
LOL, same here. I haven’t been to disneyland in years either.
But honestly, I have to give props how Obama handled himself.
I think we need to re-instate the fairness doctrine
Any debate on any commercial network is a form of corporate welfare.
The candidates present themselves to the network, and in return, the networks can do anything they want. They could make the candidates wear gorilla suits, if they wanted.
This is an unwarranted privatization of a vital civic function. There should never ever again be a presidential debate on a commercial network.
After the last one I saw i thought it couldn’t get any worse,boy was I ever wrong.
Now I’m bitter.
If we are reacting this way, millions of others who watched are also reacting this way.
The stinkin’ fake media doesn’t rule my mind, nor does it rule the minds of the country anymore.
People are sick of this.
Their antics will backfire bigtime.
About an hour and five minutes into the debate I really started wishing that both Obama and HRC had just picked up their paper, graciously thanked Gibson and Stefalumpamus and walked off the stage. Then in the “spin” room or on MSNBC or wherever just said “When they ask grown-up questions related to issues, we’ll talk to them, thanks for your time, good night”.
Hard to institute a personal boycott of ABC when I don’t have a TV. But I am boycotting in spirit!
Most voters have already made up their minds and no matter what is said or not said the outcome will be the same in Pennsylvania.
The questions in the debate now are to knock out one of the candidates by hook or by crook. The crowd followers go with the crowd. If MSM leads them to demean a candidate over and over, those quasi followers will support the candidate myth.
I didn’t see where the questions in last night’s debate (stretching that word a bit) were just inane. No. They were contrived and deliberately small-minded. Obama is the target. And, still he kept his dignity.
We may boo here but it is like a tree falling in the forest. How do we get the boo to ring across the land?
Shades of vaudeville. Then again vaudeville is an accurate description of our current political process.
I do hope it backfires - surely anyone with even a rudimentary sense of fairness will see this for what it is.
I’ve never been to Disneyland, and I’m making an effort to keep it that way.
I missed the debate because I was teaching. Glad to hear you were pleased with something about this parody of political disputation.
And we need to impose enormous penalties for violating it. Big enough that the fines can’t be written off as the cost of doing business.
It’s not my characterization, mind you. that is from foreigners..mainly europeans. Sorry, but I have heard it for years that they think americans are dumb and part of it is Bush and part is our media
The only thing liberals are willing to boycott is the boycott itself…not just my opinion…it’s a FACT.
I got “bitter for ya. From the ObamaIsTheDevil.com “liberal” website:
LOL.
A fact based on what exactly????
Sadly, European media aren’t immune either. I was disappointed recently to learn from a colleague that the Dutch media have been covering the Dem primaries in somewhat the same scandal-provoking, issue-avoiding way the American media have been. Saddening, because by reflex I had expected better of media abroad.
Liberal = Free
I’m proud to be liberal. The more liberal, the better.
i used to trust teevee a long time ago, now i tell everyone i know to read here at the lake if only for product safety (kirk) and hope they read further. gotta be more convincing. what works for other pups? it’s like pulling teeth when i mention politics.
responded downstairs. can’t wait til eCAHNs’
true but I don’t mean in respects to covering elections. Our media, local and national, rarely spend much time with regards to foreign events (unless we are involved in it). There is little to no reporting on Dafur, the killing of children by bands of police officers in Brazil, the actions of FARC, etc.) If I go watch 20 minutes of german news on the web, they are only short reports but they encompass news in germany and around the world.
BobbyG -
heh - just came back from a thread where one couldn’t tell the difference btw the HRC supporters comments and those of the dittoheads
and the post heading ?? - ‘Big Night for McCain’ could they be any more predictable ?!?!?
I have not watched abc since they broadcast that rediculous 9/11 hit piece on clinton
how are you getting up there?
The spin from MSNBC…ha, ha, ha…..the “journalists” had to focus on frivolous questions, because the candidates are so similar on their policies that they couldn’t come up with questions to address them…or something along those lines…
Spit!
I’ll certainly agree with you there. Even BBC World News on PBS is better than American media for this, and the BBC isn’t my favorite foreign media source. And also worth noting that American TV news tends to cover only the more sensationalistic rather than the most relevant stories on the national scale. I don’t understand how anybody can believe they’re getting good information from these sources.
They say Philadelphia sports fans are the toughest in the country (I know - a lot of other cities will stake their claims, but let my premise stand). After all, they’ve gone so far as to boo Santa Claus at a football game. The thing is, there is a fine art to booing, and a lot of science to it, too. Basic rules:
1. You boo because you care.
2. The true fan (Philly being a fan’s purgatory of sorts, given the teams’ signal lack of ultimate championship success) has three obligations:
- First, to show up.
- Second, the cheer when applicable.
- Third, to boo when applicable.
Obligations two and three contain within them the inherent obligation to understand the game and rules.
Depending on the team, season, and general situation, the Obligations two and three may find their positions reversed.
3. A participant who is giving his/her all in the effort, yet coming up short, gets more credit (and, proportionately, less booing and more cheering) than the gifted participant who is more or less mailing it in. This applies even if the gifted participant is leading the league in whatever major stat he/she might be leading the league in. Thus, for example, it can be perfectly acceptable to boo the Phillies’ player who is the home run champion of the National League, if he isn’t putting his all into the effort (but is instead swinging for the fences when the situtation calls for him to just get a single).
4. Umpires, officials and planned sideshows always get booed. No reason is needed. If the call was bad and against the home team, the vehemence is increased.
5. (Not applicable here) The cops always get booed when they haul off the guy who doesn’t belong on the field.
I have nothing but praise for the people in Philadelphia who booed Gibson and Little Georgie. They were living up to the true code of Philadelphia and were a credit to the city.
I’m glad you asked….when was the last time that liberals boycotted ANYTHING from the fascists right? I spent almost two weeks trying to encourage a boycott against lying ABC network after they aired a TV movie about 9/11 that implacated President Clinton as the real cause..no takers that I was aware of…please answer and might I add why do you think boycotts are good or bad?
You can say this for the American media–they know when to kiss each other’s asses.
Ditto, with few exceptions. I must admit, I do watch Boston Legal. The show is funny, and silly, and usually fairly high on a list of showcasing lefty POV. Oh, and I watch Desperate Housewives, just as naughty pleasure. That’s about it.
O/T- this is actually pretty funny:
Nahnoo, nahnoo, Mork.
I still boycott. I never purchase Nike and haven’t for decades. They don’t get a pair of socks out of me. I also stopped when my choice become China, China, China. Like an addiction, just say no.
At one time we would boycott to support a movement. For years we did’t buy grapes until the black label grapes came on the market. I searched out stores that carried them.
Today, I solo. I continue my boycott discipline but I stand alone. There is a giant indifferent wave of consumers out there who just don’t give a damn.
Pisses me off! Yep! I’m angry, frustrated and bitter towards capitalism.
“I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore…”
“We’re in a lot of trouble…”
will be working on the farmhouse further upstate. going from there (otsego cty)
I don’t watch anything on network prime time anymore. I wouldn’t be watching anything at all on the networks if there weren’t late-evening M*A*S*H reruns.
I mostly buy gas for the car, groceries and medication and texteen clothes. No money to do much else.
Maybe these ABC hacks have done the Dems a favor.
Can we at least now agree the right-wing has the MSM in their pockets?
Where’s the League of Women Voters when you need them?
yea funny dat…this is from ABC SNOOZE/DISNEY
NIE Report: Iran Halted Nuclear Weapons Program Years Ago
Email
Share
December 03, 2007 11:51 AM
ABC News’ Martha Raddatz, Jonathan Karl, Luis Martinez, Kirit Radia and Jennifer Duck Report: In a stunning reversal of Bush administration conventional wisdom, a new assessment by U.S. intelligence agencies concludes Iran shelved its nuclear weapons program over four years ago.
“We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program,” reads a declassified version of the National Intelligence Estimate key findings.
Unregulated capitalism defeats its own supposed purpose, but the fat cats get too rich to care. Regulate, enforce, punish!
What I wouldn’t give for a “book salon” type debate with ALL THREE CANDIDATES here on firedoglake! You just know the questions would be more thoughtful than anything you’ll ever see on network tv.
(Yeah, yeah, I know - I’m dreaming.)
Okay, tangent thought here, and I’m serious - is it a sign you’re a bit too involved in the political process when you start having dreams about meeting certain people and asking them questions? I have had TWO of those dreams…and one was about meeting GWB *shudders* Okay, so that one was more of a nightmare, but still…
I’m beginning to think I think too much. I need garden time.
Yes we can….and I would like to add O/T..can we at least agree that Bush’s tax cuts are the root cause of the economic downturn?
Somewhere Roman Hruska looks down on American journalism and smiles
This isn’t capitalism, it’s monopolism … Rich fat cat corporate heads have bought congress and the presidency. this in no way resembles the perfect competition that is the hallmark of capitalism. They drive out labor unions. they sit in dick cheney’s office and price fix. the just ICE department lets the merge even when the market concentration ratios are off the richter scale and they say it’s part of the ‘global’ competition thing … they beg for tax breaks, price floors and ceilings, and all other things that have NOTHING to do with anything but been the pansy asses they are — they wouldn’t know what to do with real competition if they actually got it
Hillary and Bill have made it favorable for McCain for many months. Once they get Obama out, they know Karl and the NeoCons couldn’t care less if Hillary or McCain gets the prez prize. It is the same win for them either way.
Both the Clinton and McCain and their MSM facilitators use character assassination to attack Obama. It has a long history of being successful.
Booooooo! Dirty pool!
Human socioeconomic affairs get “regulated” one way or another. “Deregulation” is simply a canard, a code word for Might Makes Right.
I figured this ‘debate’ would be a disaster. From all the reviews and comments it appears I was right. Kind of reminds me of that old proverb “Nero fiddled while Rome burned”.
IRAQ, Economy, Climate Change, Education, restoration of constitutional rights… pick one MSM and leave the crap out. I did expect more out of ABC and I am disappointed especially in Charlie Gibson.
So, so, so tired of European elitists attacking regular Yanks like me for being dumb. I didn’t choose what to learn in public school, and neither did they.
And what exactly is so superior about rotely memorizing inane irrelevancies like the number of meters from here to the moon.
I’m bitter.
tell me about it.
they’ve been doing this since reagan frigged up the friggin media
we are only now giving them some pushback and we have the tubes to thank for it
Booing is part of a great philadelphia tradition, and it was awesome to see it on display.
I’m actually surprised my fellow citizens here in the City of Brotherly Shove didn’t actually hurl stuff at Gibson and Snuffleupagus, like they did at John Rocker and Santa Claus.
BRAVO………….very succinctly put
sorry, i’m a macroeconomist and a progressive, that’s simply not true…what’s at the root of this is that all the increases in productivity have not gone to workers, it’s gone to capital and entrepreneurship, forcing labor to use their assets as atms … well, that game is over …Bush is an enabler of breaking down markets so that they only benefit those that bribe the political class and keep them in office
Along with booing, it has been a tradition to throw fruit and vegatables at the wreched performance individual. Perhaps it can make a come back since they dismiss the Boos.
Yet, where is the tough anchors asking tough questions of McCain? Matthews didn’t ask McCain anything worthy for the American people to listen to at the Doocy child school for stupid questions.
Has one media person asked McCain of the Keating five?
As foor hannity posing a question via George to the candidate(s). Hannity is on the radio and tv many hours a day and has all the slime time in the media he can blow snot at. And he is special enough to have George continue his questioning for him? There are many more in the media that should have their questions raised. It has to be a small media controlling group that has complete access and control of this?
If you read above, it is in regards to how our media covers and reports news, not our educational system.
re: boycotts - I haven’t bought so much as a pack of gum from an Exxon station since the Exxon Valdez. I did have to stop at an Exxon once, to throw up when I was pregnant - but I figured that in itself was a political statement.
I boycotted Revlon for YEARS - until they stopped testing cosmetics on animals.
And this family doesn’t go to KFC - ever.
if you haven’t seen the You Tube vedio In Memoriam for poor old George,( check it out at Americablog ) whomever created this video should at least receive an Oscar nomination for best short. Last evening was a disgrace. I was really hoping that the questions asked would be more than soft ball fluff, but no chance when it comes to the MSM. I really think the time in this campaign is long past the point where real questions about real matters are being thrown at all the candidates. Questions like where each stand on the Constitutional rights of citizens regarding free speech so as not to have a repeat of some Secret Service officer arresting someone who disagrees with Cheney on the war in a parking lot. I’d like to hear their views on FISA, torture, as well as Chertoff’s new plan to send un maned droans over our towns and cities in search of bad guys and just how they are going to preserve our privacy? I really wanted to hear the tuff questions asked about our economy or what’s left of it on life support and why government has never been allowed to audit the Federal Reserve or whether any of the candidates believe it shouldn’t be a pre requisite to take economics 101 before even making a run for office?
But no, our dumbed down society save a small percentage in the blogosphere are left with a dog and pony show that made Howdy Doody look like high drama. It was a pathetic sham and one can only hope that a few light bulbs went on in the american psyche.
Just once….I would like to hear a candidate say that the rule of law under the Constitution is what their all about and that after taking their oath, their first order of business will be running the government as the founders had set out to do.
last night was pretty bad, but the Russert/Williams horrorshow made last night look like a sweethearts dance.
And, as bad as last night was, it performed an important function. The media isn’t going to change between now and November. And what we saw was Barack Obama dealing with the kind of crap that Hillary Clinton has been forced to deal with in numerous debates, and she came out of those crapfests looking a lot better than just about anyone else could.
So as bad as last night was (and at one point I actually yelled Gibson to stop lying about capital gains tax receipts), and as unacceptable as it is, we simply can’t wish away the unpleasant fact that Clinton was pulling her punches, and McCain would have slaughtered Obama under similar circumstances.
Boycotting networks never works. They just shrug that shit off.
Boycotting their advertisers works — if you organize and let them know it. Every time.
Disney-fied debate…….without the little graphics POW WHAM SPAT
Ain’t that the truth! I have less and less for basic survival. I couldn’t afford to buy my granddaughter a gift for her fifteenth birthday so I gave her some of my most treasured books (she loves to read) and my bookends. When she turned thirteen I gave her a family heirloom that goes back generations. She understands what it means to be a steward.
Everything on the market is just cheap ugly stuff way over-priced. The plus side is that I get to give my family things that I know they treasure since childhood. Better than after I’m gone and read from a will.
Still, I know young girls love sassy makeup. I did. It was just so far beyond my purse.
do you have the link?
I’d have to assume that last night’s performance by ABC was to make up for their impertinence to report on The Torture Club meetings in the White House. ABC News still has a lot of repentin’ to do to make up for their disloyal reportage.
Charlie and George get points for being frontmen in ABC’s Loyalty Play. Look for their imminent exclusives with prominent members of the Bush/Cheney administration - coming soon on a TV set near you…
Right on. That is a testament to living your politics.
scribe@ 44, I couldn’t agree more!
www.americablog.com
yup…DISNEY DUMBS DOWN your kids,and the public discourse….dont buy anything Disney or ESPN…nada
I am sorry to note that the performance of these ABC bobbleheads is perfectly predictable.
I have boycotted ABC, CBS, NBC, the NY Times WAPO and the lot of them who are responsible for the dumbing down of america and the atmosphere of racism and war mongering, empty patriotism and false religiosity.
Screw them all.
Here.
i’ve never seen some one who is supposed to be ‘neutral’ be so upset about loosing his pet little tax loophole.. was that an absolute obsessive rave and plug for, please, please, don’t close my favorite tax loophole…
would like to remind everyone that abc-anything but content, is also the media outlet that published the article about hillary being in the white house on ’stained blue dress day’……..
here’s the letter i sent that day….could have been structured better, i was typing into a little box, should have cut and pasted it…oh well. i was in a hurry.
they make impossible to contact them without giving personal information to register, so i think this time got in through the terms of agreement button, that works by the way, little tip for ya, when you can’t get in somewhere-go to terms of agreement. usually a contact option located there without registering….
=======
This is my last straw with ABC. Because of your article titled/paraphrased– ”Hillary
Clinton in White House on ’Stained Blue Dress’ Day”, I am
now going to call your network
ABC-Anything But Content
I am appalled in too many ways to articulate, from the
title, from the article, to why is this news? so, I’ll leave it
at that, for now…..
You have turned into The National Enquirer, in a time
when there are so many things affecting our populace
and the world, and this is what you choose to print.
Appalling, did I say that already?
When I do get my words back in order, you can bet I’ll
be writing a few letters about this.
I tried to register to comment, but you ask for a
birthdate, noone in their right mind would give that
information in this new era of file breaches. Most sites
just ask for email, that’s enough verification.
well, yes in this particular context, but I’ve heard it much more often directed at Americans as a general discription. And it is almost always intended to blame the American, not the system that generates the stupidity.
Good for you. I do do the same and won’t give a penny to the war mongering exploitive corporations is possible.
Dear Dakinikat,
What tax loophole? I missed the whole thing. I was too busy not watching television.
In defense
What options are there.
Explore the key policy differences between the candidates?
There ARE no key policy differences between the two candidates.
Could have spent an hour on the one difference between the two health plans AGAIN I guess.
ditto.
Seems to me, since they were quoting from the bill of rights, they should’ve spent more time asking questions about how the Bush administration has conveniently forgotten most of then … it could’ve been a real interesting debate … to me the only time it had any connection was when Hillary said something about Dick Cheney thinking he was a fourth branch … and obama, a constitutional law prof … this was the perfect opportunity to delve into what it truely means to take an oath that is based on defending the constitution …
I asked last night but got no reply so maybe no one knows but are there going to be any more debates? I hope not but I need to plan ahead about what I am not going to watch.
charlie was all upset about the possibility of having capital gains taxes increased… he want on an absolute tear on it thought he was going to jump over the table and shake senator obama at one point …
Souljah Boy takes on Gibson - me likey!
link
I don’t think that one out of ten americans votes on policy proposals- so maybe ABC was giving the voters what they need.
At least that would have been dealing with issues of concern to voters.
It’s become “American Idol” without the “charm.”
Bobby
Nicely put!
most of my friends are from europe and they love america and think americans are the friendliest folks in the world but think that are institutions have not served us well. It’s circular reasoning. If your media doesn’t report on things happening in the wider world but rather on gossip, it says much about your audience and by implication your system that educates them (talking about britney all day must mean we haven’t the capacity to discuss anything above that).
Maybe the better word is ignorant and not dumb
Obama hasn’t agreed to the North Carolina debate yet, what do you think the chances are now that he will?
Very much all true…I should have been more specific. I should have said tax cuts for the rich…ergo they are in my opinion the ‘root cause’ of economic troubles. Excess revenue can start a chain reaction of ‘in confident infrastructures’ aimed at increasing the dollars value and encourging more investment based on solid assets.
They could have brought up many interesting questions that could have produced enlightening answers that would be very beneficial in determining what are the differences between Senator Clinton and Senator Obama.
But no… We’re in a lot of trouble.
as put very well in Howard Beale’s rant, especially from 1:45 to 2:06
There are some, but they’re admittedly minor. I think problem that the media are having in organizing these debates is that there have already been 20+ debates, and the media think that additional debates should cover new ground. They shouldn’t. They need to cover the bread and butter issues all over again. The voters of Pennsylvania were probably not paying attention to the debates that happened several months ago, because they weren’t getting ready to go to the polls. That’s why you have debates right before the election.
It doesn’t REALLY make a lot of sense to vote on policy proposals anyway- insofar as they are really in the domain of the congress- not the executive branch.
What voters should WANT to know is what kind of a President the candidate will be- but of course there’s no way of knowing that- and voters aren’t qualified to evaluate it anyway. So?
thanks for the answer. I don’t think he should agree to another one of these “things” - whatever they are - certainly not debates or even informative.
meanwhile how many people stayed up all night wondering how to hold onto their homes now that their jobs are in jeopardy? the capital gain tax fear of Charlie gibson…projectile vomit inducing, wasn’t it?
Very good point. I’ve boycotted ABC and Disney since the appalling “Road to 9/11,” and I contacted advertisers then, but I haven’t since. Need to start another round of that.
I was originally going to respond to earlier comments by noting that while I often participate personally, I don’t generally encourage calls for boycotts and general strikes because they’re an action that has no effect unless a huge proportion of people participate, and there are few categories where politically-active liberals constitute a huge proportion of people. Thus calling for a boycott or strike tends to result mainly in proponents complaining that no one’s following their lead. (I hope you don’t take this personally, i4u2bi; my point is that it’s a pretty common trope.)
But I agree, boycotting advertisers is different, as Spocko has so clearly shown. They do actually pay some attention to criticism, and not just aggregate audience/customer numbers, and that’s a good place to focus our efforts.
Meanwhile something that could have been discussed last night at the debate, namely the health of our soldiers and vets.
1 in 5 Iraq and Afghanistan vets have PTSD or ‘major depression.’
Finally. Jeezus.
More people understanding what Conglomerate Media is about is one positive out of this whole campaign season so far. There was that debate a while back where people were yelling at Russert while it was going on….multiple times. Now last night. I don’t remember seeing such vocal outrage against moderators before.
The role of BigMedia, which exists now to keep the electorate voting in politicians that will not rock BigMoney’s boat, has been painfully obvious for 20+ years, yet few people have tried to understand this, and even fewer have done anything about it.
Perhaps now more “mainstreamers” will start gravitating to New Media outlets like FDL and others. We should all be spreading the good word. This public resentment could be a golden opportunity for us in the Netroots already.
Well, that kinda undercuts the main premise of democracy.
http://abcnews.go.com/Site/pag.....20Specials
Tell ABC what you REALLY think
HERE’S THE FIRST FALLOUT
BREAKING:
TIME JUST REPORTED ” Obama campaign to hold 12:30 pm ET media call with Clinton Pennsylvania supporters who are switching their support to Obama due to the “recent wave of negativity.”
Way to go Charlie!
I lost my job March 1st 2007 in the wake of a QIO Medicare contract funding cutback. My wife summarily got the axe in late October 2007. I just cashed out an IRA CD the other day to put it into my mortgage. We’ve been selling some of our stock holdings, but that stuff is down about 25% since the fall. My 401k has lost about 10% since Q307.
At least I own a George Foreman grill and a couple hundred feet of AC extension cable, so I’m ready for the underpass.
“I watched the debate last night. I had hoped to hear the candidates positions on defending the constitution, health care, the housing crisis, the developing world food crisis, Osama Bin Laden and Afghanistan, ANY number of things relevent to our declining influence in the world of diplomacy, ‘enhanced’ interrogation techniques … ANY thing with SUBSTANCE. Instead heard the candidates ask questions that were probably even below the National Enquirer’s journalistic standards. SHAME ON YOU ABC!”
My feedback to the rotters…
well, well, well.
Not only that, he was demanding that they agree to the wingnut canard that cuts in the capital gains taxes produced an increase in tax revenue, and increases would lower tax revenues. I understand that it wasn’t something they were prepared for, but it would have been great if one of them could have responded “Charlie, that’s just not true. You’re a journalist, look up the facts.”
(Yeah, I know, calling him a journalist is a stretch, but you have to pick your battles.)
Speaking of the National Enquirer debate, I loved the bit from Hunter on Kos, characterizing the questions as “Senator Obama, will you make Bat Boy your Secretary of State?”
You have enlightened friends, for sure. My experience is that while Europeans think North Americans are friendly, maybe good to have a beer with, most substanative discussions are best kept among equals — i.e. other Europeans. It is an attitude that is utterly ethnocentric. And I’ve yet to meet a European who can grasp that concept.
I can’t disagree that Americans are ignorant. That is pretty obvious. But our whole system (a la stephanopolis) is the problem.
And, our culture is just different that European culture. It is not polite for us to discuss politics socially. Not true of Europeans. They don’t get that, and instead mistake it for ignorance.
Link, please. Wow!
the only capital gain I could possibly have experienced is the rapidly declining value of my home … read that MY HOME, not my vacation cabin or my inherited stock portfolio … and he was trying to ask questions about Senator OBAMA being elitist … sheesh
I didn’t watch either, but if you want to see the lowlights (if you’ve been diagnosed with low blood pressure, for example), TPM has a good short video of them.
I’m sorry to hear about that, Bobby. Your story and the others like your should have been the topic of discussion last night. Not the salacious bullshit that I would expec to seee grace the cover of the National Inquirer. *sigh* damn stupid belly low political discourse*
This is exactly the stuff Glen Greenwald’s new book is about: http://www.salon.com/books/exc.....greenwald/
Hunter over at the Great Orange Satan has the best phrase for todays media:
I don’t think I can top that.
I can’t find this. Please supply linky. Thanks.
true but i disagree that they mistake our social registry with regards to politics as ignorance. It’s not that we won’t talk about it, rather that we don’t know about it (dafur, FARC, etc.) My husband is a brit and is constantly amazed at how many people don’t read newspapers or listen to the radio/internet etc to obtain news and are just unaware of what’s going on around them…that is ignorance
LOL! Yeah, thanks.
At least I’m not upside down in my mortgage. And, we have no consumer debt of any kind, just our mortgage. No car payments, furniture, appliances, etc.
I’ve made hundreds of job apps since getting rif’d. Zip, zero, zilch, nada. Being 62 doesn’t help.
We’re now also paying about $7,500 a year for retail “catastrophic” health care “coverage. Sux.
That seems straight out of the Clinton playbook.
more like Lee Atwater
That is pretty much the only context that people will have any run in with capital gains tax…that is in regards to their home. I am amazed that millionaire talking leaf blowers can begin to think, let alone pontificate about the cares of working class folks.
here’s a transcript of the debate, so you can quote from it in your letters……….i find that useful….
http://blogs.suntimes.com/swee.....ebate.html
Found a link to the press call.
Glenzilla has posted an article on the debate:
BWAAAAHAAAAHAAAHAAA!!!!! Just fucking classic. Emphasis mine.
Even if that was their reasoning, I think it’s pretty obnoxious for the moderators to decide that there are few major policy differences between the candidates, so there’s no point in bringing those issues up. If you’re going to call it a debate, a reasonable approach to that situation would be to ask the candidates to distinguish their positions. Some of the answers would be trivia, but they couldn’t possibly be more trivial than the things they did ask about. (And how many Republican debates did we have with questions that were variations on Colbert’s “George Bush: great president or greatest president?” and where no one but Ron Paul expressed a dissenting opinion?)
And if the motivation was actually “well, everyone already knows their positions on X,” or to cover new ground, even if you leave out Iraq, the mortgage crisis, and a few others, there’s no shortage of issues that have gotten no coverage at all.
The most charitable motivation that can be ascribed to last night’s performance is an extreme form of the motivation for all of these “journalist” moderated debates — they know it’ll only be “news” if they can get a sound bite that is embarrassing. (The only hole in that argument is why it doesn’t apply to Republican debates.)
Now that is beautiful
David, thanks for this great post.
First we boo them,
Then we punish their advertisers (and hurt the mouse whenever possible).
Quick review of (some of) the points of intervention for direct action - courtesy of the great folks at SmartMeme:
- Points of assumption [changing assumption - that’s what FDL already does]
- Point of Production [that’s what the withering comments at ABC’s website target…the ABC “grunts” (including talking heads)]
- Point of Consumption [places where customers can be reached. The realm of consumer boycotts and markets campaigns.]
- Point of Decision [Corporate HQ. Slumlords office.
Location of targeted decision maker]
WTF does this have do with boycotting advertisers?
That’s our (empowered) point of production. Unless you’re a Nielsen family, turning off your TV does nothing.
TV is just filler between the ad content that makes money for ABC. In that sense, manipulating opinion - as they did last night - is just a bonus for them.
Our direct Point of Production to hurt ABC where they care - their income stream - is boycotting the advertisers for last night’s farce…and ABC’s three largest advertisers in general (whoever they are).
And contacting the advertisers to tell them why we’re not buying whatever the crap du ad was last night - that puts the hurt on the Point of Decision.
Follow the money: and strangle it.
Will this direct action strategy be relevat to every reader at FDL? Nope - just the ones with disposable (or redirectable) purchasing power.
The ones ABC needs to stay in business.
Perhaps part of our ignorance stems from the cultural pressure not to discuss politics. There may very well be a subtle cultural influence that disinclines the media from covering weighty political matters. Just a thought.
Gobama, gobama….he’s blasting them…hoodwinkin’, bamboo slingin’….
Can you say hit-job backfire!!!!
The Clintons could care less about anyone’s health plan when it comes to them maintaining their brand and getting back to the White House. If you want to lament the state of the electronic media, look again to the Clintons and the Communications Act of 1996 which they actively supported and which has contributed directly to the present condition.
Sorry, but I’m just not buying that the questions raised by Obama’s tacit approval of Wright’s angry, racist views, his characterizations of middle class and working class people, and Hillary’s lies about being under sniper fire are irrelevant or trivial. These are indicative of character.
If we had paid attention to character, Republicans would never have gotten a majority elected to anything much less put a sociopath in the White House.
Character matters most. If the person in question disguises his/her real positions or flat out lies/denies facts, what is the point of listening to what they have to say about the issues while they are trying to achieve a personal end?
Of course positions on issues matter, but what do these matter if you have no intention of trying to realize those position given the power for which you’re asking.
And this is, of course, not to let McCain off the hook. His character is seriously questionable as well.
Could be but considering that many don’t watch or read things that would be condusive to a political awareness let alone discussion, it leaves them unable to have a discussion if one were presented or desired.
but I think that the removal of the fairness doctrine and the subsequent merging of entertainment and news medias have born a news media that is not interested in news gathering or investigative reporting, rather the sordid news that will turn over the quickest buck
kirk–check your mail–around 8:30 your time.
Where is/was this? I couldn’t connect to the audio.
What was it in Wright’s views that were “racist”? Was his anger unjustified?
Just curious.
Bullseye!
But the Fairness Doctrine can not be applied to cable media. It works for over the air media because the public, i.e. the government owns and can control the airwaves. The first amendment prevents application of the Fairness Doctine to cable & satellite media.
very true, I guess I should have stated that this applied to network media not the cable or satellite folks
whitebeard at 143-”And this is, of course, not to let McCain off the hook. His character is seriously questionable as well.”
i don’t have any questions about his character, or his wife’s.. : )
That’s an interesting take, but I didn’t see it that way. Hillary seemed pretty happy to joint with Charlie and George in pursuing the cheap stuff, until Obama was finally forced to fire a shot across her bow with the statement about Bill pardonning former Weathermen. Hillary was ready to go to break, rather than pursue the issue, and that was the end of the cheapshot stuff for the night.
Can’t argue with you there. But maybe Americans don’t seek out political information because of subtle social pressure too. Maybe we don’t want to seem high falutin’ throwing around all kinds of knowledge. Dunno.
I’ve made the argument that it is easier to be unaware of things that do not affect you. if you are a struggling farmer in Missouri, you aren’t concerned with much except with things that relate specifically to your own livlihood. Call it isolationism but when you extrapolate that out to all of america, it sort of encapsulates the perception of the ‘american’ view. If it doesn’t directly affect us, we don’t know or care about it.
I’m sure you weren’t “just curious.” You brought the subject up (i.e. “Obama’s ‘pastor problem’”). You wouldn’t have done so without having reviewed the facts would you? You explain how Wright’s condemnation of America, his call for God to damn America is not just racist, it’s an inappropriate incitement of hatred.
Anger justified? At injustice, yes. At all of America today and forever?
“I don’t have any questions about his character, or his wife’s.. : )”
*laughs*
“…it’s an inappropriate incitement of hatred.”
That should have been: “it’s *not*…”
Well, then, did you ever bother to watch the entire sermon? Because he makes it clear that yes, we can say God bless America for some things, but we should say God damn America for things like slavery and lynching.
Frankly, that’s the way I feel as well. And I’m not exactly black.
Moreover, I don’t hate America. I just see it with open eyes. The genocide of Native Americans? Lynching, slavery, sundown towns? The internment of the Japanese? Well, we should be condemned for those things by their victims.
That video is very telling. Gibson’s too much of a pompous ass to realize what’s happening, but Stephenopolous knows exactly what kind of minefield he just wandered into.
MSNBC played a clip of a campaign stop today…it was great.
A transcript:
Oh, yes, I *ever* watched all of Wright’s speeches/sermons that were available. I guess you don’t understand that damning to the religious, which we must assume Wright is, implies eternal punishment while blessing can be as fleeting as, say, a ray of sunshine. It is not America today that practices slavery. It is not America today or yesterday that lynches(ed) black people.
Your demagoguery is much like his and no better than that of the other side.
Um, well, read his sermon. The “God damn America” was specifically in the context of what you acknowledge were “unjust acts.” You say: “Anger justified? At injustice, yes.” Well, then, read exactly what he said, because it’s no different than what you said.
And while we pat ourselves on the back over the fact that we no longer practice slavery or lynching, perhaps you’ve missed the fact that the legacies of slavery and lynching and sundown towns very much remain with us today. That residential segregation largely persists. That young black men still endure disproportionate job discrimination. That poverty is still closely associated with race.
That’s not hateful. It’s not anti-American. It’s fact.
“it’s an inappropriate incitement of hatred”
Whitebeard, the values you chose to show the world (in your own writing on your own blog) leave me with no confidence in your definitions of “inappropriate” and “hatred”.
Blergh. Those who find terms of religious, ethnic, or other forms of prejudice to be fit for retention in public debate are not people I’ll be reading - or heeding.
You continue to avoid confronting what I find issue with in Wright’s words:
1. Damning all of America past and present certainly means damning all of the American people, which is most assuredly unjust.
2. I’m reasonably certain, too, that he really didn’t mean damn all the American people, for that would include black people, too. Blaming them for slavery and lynchings, etc., is not just unjust, it’s irrational. I’m pretty sure that the American people Wright wants damned, therefore, are white people and that’s just plain racist as well as unjust. Aall white people are not responsible for the injustices done to black people.
Obviously you don’t understand. It’s clear to anyone who reads Wright’s words:
that Reverend Wright doesn’t subscribe to your concept of damnation.
So, perhaps this is all simply a semantic misunderstanding.
“Those who find terms of religious, ethnic, or other forms of prejudice to be fit for retention in public debate are not people I’ll be reading - or heeding.”
Well then I guess we won’t find you supporting or heeding the first amendment to the U.S. Constitution either, will we?
hee hee
who’s gonna be the first one to ask him?
“…guess…”
“…assume…”
“…implies…”
argument.fall.down.go.boom.
Hide your head in the sand if you like, but you’re not exactly entitled to the high-road status when you assert that equality is here.
Reverend Wright and his generation should take their experiences and shove them back in the closet, because you are ashamed to look at what was done to the culture and race?
Visit a black church.
You’re placing way to much emphasis on the fear you draw from the sound-bites that initiated this “event,” and remarkably little from any historical context.
High-road?
I’m no better than anyone else and neither is anyone else.
Sounds like projection to tell me my head is in the sand. I am disputing Niewert’s opinion. Openly.
too bad Charlie kind of seemed like a legitimate TV newscaster. He has stood lock step just like the whole embedded unbiased news media HA! with the LIES of the Bush administration. His Precious grandson will probably be serving and dying for McCain’s HUNDRED year war. Karma Charlie? the blood of our murdered soldiers and all the murdered Iraqis will never come off your hands. You and the whole Fourth Estate are culpable in Bush’s War Crimes
angeranddespair | 04.17.08 - 12:23 pm | #
whitebeard at 161-”
Oh, yes, I *ever* watched all of Wright’s speeches/sermons that were available. ”
and how many was that?
then you must have dropped a HUGE chunk of change in your research………cuz they’re a lot of years of them available on the church’s website.
i went to and read every single link…….even the bookstore. to see what they were offering. both in propoganda and education.
so, in saying this, you were’t aware of this, how many sermons were available, or his books, i guess, which means you also didn’t read anything on what his church represents or does in their community……i noticed you didn’t mention his books.
which means you are basing your opinion on news clips and youtube..and maybe even interpreted print media…….my, that’s well-rounded /s
if you watched all of his sermons, then you must be a millionaire……
Memo to the media:
Next time, it won’t be just abuse we’re hurling at you.
Umm… available means available to me… and yes, that was youtube, etc., and many of those were “conventional” sermons which were unremarkable compared to the one under discussion. So, your position is that because he only said it once or twice that it doesn’t count or didn’t always repeat it that it doesn’t count or are you just trying to change the subject?
I’m almost beginning to enjoy the personal attacks… It’s beginning to feel just like right-wing websites here. ;-)
I agree. To condemn ABC anchormen for their questions is to ignore the very core of the character of these candidates; why these “petty insignificant” issues matter helps explain the candidate, his past actions, alliances, etc. which help define his/her character and person. Any candidate can promise to solve all the problems in the world and be different in today’s world of politics. But we don’t know what any of them will do. That is why all these actions in their past and how they express themselves presently are important.
Is Charles Gibson the lightest lightweight on television? (after everyone on Fox). Why are all news people such lightweights today? The other guy, George, sounds like he has real personality problems, as in the expression “political sleazebag”. It sounded like both these turds were trying to play “Gotcha” with the candidates. The contrast bewteen the candidates and the moderators made the candidates both look like great statespeople and intellectual giants. Meanwhile, Charle and George looked [edited by mod].
Damn, you guys sound straight out of a 1990s Clinton-impeachment gabfest featuring Barbara Olson and Ann Coulter. Because that was their argument about Clinton — that he had a defective “character” that of course, they in their immense wisdom not only were able to detect but to judge. Feh.
“you guys sound straight out of a 1990s Clinton-impeachment gabfest featuring Barbara Olson and Ann Coulter.”
*laughs* you really are vicious in your personal attacks Neiwert, but “Ann Coulter?” Ann Coulter? *shakes his head laughing*
Are we to interpret this salvo as meaning you don’t think character matters or that it isn’t discernible from past actions and words?
Oh! You mean character and past actions like John McCain and Charles Keating and all the lobbyists working for him and cutting deals from the back of his bus and all the flip-flopping he’s done?
That kind of character?
Sure seems to be more character flaws there than any body sitting listening to a sermon.
Well, in Real Estate the capital gains tax does not kick in until you have OVER $500,000 in PROFIT on your personal home (not vacation homes).
How many people are going to be hit by that? Half a mil free and clear, capital gains kicks in on profits above this amount.
We gave up watching ABC evening news and switched to nice music while we eat dinner, the BBC and then Lehrer Report.
Now I will try to discover who sponsors ABC and will boycott their products.
“Oh! You mean character and past actions like John McCain and Charles Keating and all the lobbyists working for him and cutting deals from the back of his bus and all the flip-flopping he’s done?
That kind of character?”
Yes, that’s what I mean and said in my original post. None of this group of candidates deserves a pass on character. I won’t argue which of the character traits is worse. Okay, maybe I would. :-)
Paul, the NBC/MSNBC horror show was certainly unrelenting. All this talk about boycotting ABC… will they also turn off NBC/MSNBC and KO? ABC’s ganging up on Obama is just a taste of what he can expect from the MSM if he were the nominee and he needed to handle it with more aplomb. His inexperience showed.
I guess, of course, that means you supported President Clinton, in that darkest moment of his presidency?