Libby case fallout: Shifting lines for the media – International Herald Tribune — Not sure why this turn of events is surprising anyone, The whole press corps in Washington acts more like they work for the government than acting like they work for publications supposedly serving the public. They are simply too chummy with officials who outright lie. Press conferences are staged and nobody complains. Journalists protect sources who turn out to be prosecutors or government people out to manipulate them. And most news organizations have incredible conflicts of interest. General Electric owns NBC for example.
Following Libby’s conviction Tuesday, it is possible to start assessing that damage to the legal protections available to news organizations, to relationships between journalists and their sources and to the informal but longstanding understanding in Washington, now shattered, that leak investigations should be pressed only so hard.
Ten out of 19 of the witnesses in Libby’s trial were journalists, a spectacle that would have been unthinkable only a few years ago.
Even more unusual, three of them played a central role in securing the conviction of Libby, their former source, by testifying about conversations they had once fought to keep secret by invoking the majesty of the First Amendment and the crucial role that confidential informants play in informing citizens in a free society.
found by Will Hearst
I’d like to remind John D. Dvorak that he himself is part of this “media”. Unless of course you want to start categorizing everyone, you yourself are lumped into that which you’re criticizing now. You know…throwing stones and all.
Playing the observer of it all, commenting/reporting on the reporting, doesn’t absolve a person nor make them any more trustworthy. We should call it for what it is, a snake eating it’s own tail.
I’m not denying what you say. Does that mean I shouldn’t complain?
Several years ago I read (in reference to longtime 60 Minutes producer Don Hewitt) that the power guys did the worst thing to him that they could possibly do to a Journalist – they invited him inside. Once inside, Hewitt and his cohort became a part of the power structure and just couldn’t bring themselves to criticize their new pals. They used Mario Cuomo as an example – a onetime reformer who became an insider, thereby losing his balls.
Journalists like I.F. Stone are long gone, and anyone who tries to imitate Izzy Stone now will end up like all victims of the bush Family Evil Empire (BFEE) – ruined, humiliated, and possibly dead.
Somehow I don’t see how the power structure has corrupted Mr. Dvorak, although I’ll bet that many technology companies have tried.
#1 – No, it isn’t a snake eating its own tail.
The media isn’t a monlithic entity. It’s thousands of little snakes. Thanks to media consolidation, and a government that refuses to address the issue, there are also a couple of really big snakes.
Honestly, unless you are involved in the story, you really don’t know how good your coverage is. You don’t know how a reporter checked and triple-checked his information. But you can compare multiple outlets and make reasonable guesses about who is giving you better info.
Obviously, some of this gets colored by prejudice on the part of some observers. I typically laugh at the accusations against NPR for being lefties… Yes. They tend to lean a bit to the left, but I happen to think that the left is where you end up when you are also accurate, ethical, and honest… which is, the color of my prejudice 🙂
My point though is that being critical of “The Media” is about as useful as being critical of “children” or “birds”. It’s just too many people, too many sub groups, too many outlets to allow a sweeping generalization stand up like that.
But whatever, I think we should all agree that if they all went back to the Edward R Murrow school of jounalism, the world would be a better place to live.
$ – Maybe, but then what would be neo-cons and other revolutionary right wingers do? There’d be light shining everywhere and the cockroaches now in power would really have to scurry.
I tend to agree with you on the points you brought up. In a round about way, it was the point I was trying to make, but unfortunately my writing style doesn’t convey my point as succinctly as I would like. Lumping everyone, including John, into this faceless entity called “the media” is a bit naive, yet we all tend to do this everyday.
There are, for me at least, good media outlets which I tend to trust more than others, but even this can lead down a path of ruin. Not all outlets remain consistent, as reporters and producers and writers and editors come and go on a regular basis and with this, bias and even myopia slip in. CBS in it’s day was the bastion of honesty and integrity, but as we saw just a few years ago, even they got a black-eye.
But things really get interesting when journalists turn inward and examine the profession itself and write about how they’re all on a highway to hell, yet none seem to want to jump off, and so they continue their ride toward oblivion….taking us with them.
#4, 5, & 6
Well said and I agree with most.
#6, I disagree that CBS News failed. I assume you mean the “Dan Rather” affair where he was given an apparently fraudulent letter. One error does not ruin the whole organization. The facts of the case were true yet the right wing buried Rather and CBS in an attempt to kill the truth in the story. The failing was in allowing the Swift Boating of CBS and Rather to succeed.
The beauty of the internet allows us to quickly check background information. It also gives a platform to those who have a greater interest then the truth. The diversity is great; the winnowing of fact from fiction isn’t.
#5, I’m sure #4 enjoyed being referred to as a dollar sign. I understand how that happened, but it is funny.
#7
Actually, under the Bush regime I know longer see dollar signs that often, so I rather liked it 🙂
Mr. Fusion –
Please don’t try the “fake but accurate” argument..
What I love is journalists crying about how they are being treated like regular people.
What is it about writing that makes journalists think they are:
A) Brighter than everyone else,
and
B) Somehow more entitled.
I understand the first amendment; the press should be free to report what ever they feel the need to report. Getting a pass from the law and getting special treatment whenever they wave their press pass is not in anyway what the founding fathers intended when they wrote the first amendment.
Freedom here is a right to report what ever you find. It is not freedom from being a responsible member of society.
thank god we have Steven Colbert!
Frank,
Tell us that you actually believe Bush wasn’t AWOL, he passed his physical, and he completed his service. Somehow the neo-cowards have a vested interest in shouting that aspect down, yet have no compulsion about smearing decorated heroes that actually went to serve their country.