Skip to comments.Columnist Bemoans The Loss Of “Privacy” In Journolist Story; Conspiring Amongst “Friends” Is A-Ok!
Posted on 07/24/2010 1:18:59 PM PDT by Starman417
This tripe from Kathleen Parker is something. She bemoans the loss of privacy and kinship when the Journolist blew up in the faces of some 400+ reporters:
It should come as no surprise that self-identifying liberals have liberal thoughts and friends, so no foul there, as Carlson has said. And, indeed, some of the comments are, on their face, condemnable, not to mention banal. But some also have been presented out of context and, besides, were offered as part of an ongoing argument among colleagues who believed they were acting in good faith that theirs was a private conversation.
Were they naive to think so? In this world, yes. Was Carlson right to out the private comments of people who, for the most part, have no significant power? That, to me, is the more compelling issue.
No significant power?
They conspired amongst themselves to get the Wright story off of the air:
Others went further. According to records obtained by The Daily Caller, at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to protect their favored candidate. Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage.
In one instance, Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obamas relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obamas conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares and call them racists.
Michael Tomasky, a writer for the Guardian, also tried to rally his fellow members of Journolist: Listen folksin my opinion, we all have to do what we can to kill ABC and this idiocy in whatever venues we have. This isnt about defending Obama. This is about how the [mainstream media] kills any chance of discourse that actually serves the people.
Read more at floppingaces.net...
Whatever happened to the good old days when you and your friends could plot to destroy someone’s reputation and career in private?
That would be true if they had any sense of shame, humility, integrity, or honor.
ie; Joe the Plumber, Rush Limbaugh, Jack and Jeri Ryan, etc...
You know it’s bad, when it takes days for the left to come up with “rationality” to protect groupthink members from considering the evidence.
Privacy, another term for adultery and stabbing in the back of those who trust your official position.
Every commentator who tosses the usual “racist” canard in lieu of reason should be confronted as a member of Journolist.
You trash our privacy, so we trash yours. Get used to it. You are NOT a privileged class; this is America.
If you don't like it, bring it! We do the work you guys won't do.
Parker sides ther leftist Journolisters. Capt. Louis Renault alert, yawn.
How do we counter the leftist journalists. Example. Merrill Goozner is on the list. His 7/20 article is healined: New Gel Puts Women in Charge of AIDS Prevention . . . gel can limit the spread of the infection by 39 percent. If women routinely used the gel within a dozen hours before and after sex, the risk of contracting AIDS from an infected partner was reduced by 54 percent.
So Women are now in charge of changing the number of bullets in the magazine pointed at them from 100 to only 20 (54% of 39%).
That is the leftist concept of addressing the situation. Now imagine the cost of UN workers in all of Africa being paid to remind the women in the right time frame before and after. Essentially, any man who provides the gel has the license to rape.
What gets journalists’ undie in a knot is that the journolist exposed the participants’ bias. But everyone is biased, and journalists more so than most. This exposure is embarrassing for them because they have carefully cultivated this fantasy that journalists can be unbiased observers merely reporting facts. They make a large show of separating editorial from reportorial functions in media to maintain that fantasy. I well remember Cronkite’s signature signoff during his broadcasts, an imperial, omniscient “And that’s the way it is this 24th day of July, 1966.”
No one has omniscience, well except for God. No one is unbiased. That we have, because of squeamishness from the days of yellow journalism, tolerated and even insisted on a claim of no bias indicates we like living in fantasyland. That the journolist has exposed that fantasy makes the participants outraged, the profession as a whole embarrassed, and society perhaps a little more aware of reality.
It’s way past time to stop pretending journalists can report only facts and reality. They report their observations and their observations are colored by their biases. My suggestion to Kathleen Parker, Admitting your problem is the first step to recovery. We as a society would be a lot smarter if we simply admitted that every source of information has inbuilt bias and if we stopped pretending that any source is unbiased.
Waaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh! They did to us what we should have done to Obama - the outed us - Waaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh!
The Ministry of Truth was caught red-handed, and they don’t like the fact that the spotlight is on them for a change.
They have lost control of the narrative, and this self-righteous, indignant folderol from WaPo makes for a pretty pathetic figleaf.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.