Skip to comments.OLD MEDIA WHINES ABOUT BLOGGERS
Posted on 10/09/2004 10:45:48 AM PDT by forest
Last week, Cliff Kincaid, Editor of the Accuracy In Media Report, wrote that at least two in Congress have considered a Rathergate hearing. Actually, the way I heard it was that Rep. Chris Cox requested that House Commerce Committee Chairman Joe Barton (R-TX) schedule a hearing but Barton was not overly enthused with the idea.
Rep. Barton is quoted as saying, "A news organization's responsibility is to facts and truth, but the oversight of network news generally is a matter best sorted out by the viewing public and the news media."
I wholeheartedly agree.
There is a simple reason most of "Old Media" is losing money. The majority of the American public understands that most "journalists" working in the Old Media slant the political news they report to the left. Being shunned by so many American people nowadays, Old Media's profit margin is adversely affected.
CBS is investigating itself, so they say. However, they are not going about it in an acceptable way. Rather intentionally used false information to harm a sitting president during a campaign cycle. The bloggers in the "New Media" caught Rather and nailed him for it. Today, most everyone in both Old and New media agree the documents Rather used were forged. So, what's to investigate? Just call in Madame Guillotine to perform the necessary surgery.
Les Moonves, the co-president of CBS' parent company, Viacom, sort of announced the reason for the (cover-up) investigation at a Goldman Sachs media conference in New York. He said there was no timetable for the completion of the investigation but that, "Obviously, it should be done probably after the election is over so that it doesn't affect what's going on."
Let's see if we can get that straight: It is okay for the CBS news hacks to broadcast false information about President Bush during an election cycle. It is not okay, however, for CBS to broadcast that the Kerry campaign and Democratic Party gave CBS the forged documents because that information could be seen as favorable to President Bush and expose the Democratic Party activists (including those in the media) for the lying cheats that they are.
Is that how it works, Moonves? Sure looks that way.
Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) told a meeting of the TV engineering trade group, MSTV, that broadcast network news divisions "need to have safeguards to prevent reporters from infusing their opinions into news reports."
Agreed. But how? Old Media has the same freedom of speech as the rest of us. We can tell them to take a hike and/or stop supporting socialism but we cannot make them shut up. We can refuse to watch or listen to their programming misinformation and stop buying their newspapers, but we cannot constitutionally pass a law to censor their talking or writing.
What we can do, and are doing, is putting them out of business by not watching, listening or reading their leftist-liberal dribble. Because, they cannot pass a law forcing us to buy their product -- or the products of their sponsors.
Move over Old Media, New Media is here and has you stuck between a rock and a hard place. Old Media knows it, too, and the whining, kicking and screaming has already started.
Walter Cronkite's disparaging remarks about the Internet are on record several times. At the Society of Professional Journalists meeting in New York last month, Cronkite said: "I cannot understand how the Internet should have gotten so entirely oblivious to the whole theory of libel and slander. How is it possible for these people to get on the air with any allegation they want to make, any statement they want to make, as if it were true, as if they were journalists, which they are clearly not? They are scandalmongers."
Does that need comment? Nah.
It's sour grapes all around at the newsrooms nowadays because they see their pink slips coming. Liberalism is out -- or will be soon. Which means, liberal "journalists" are also on their way out.
The New Yorker magazine sponsored a panel discussion in New York last Saturday. It turned out to be a whining session for Old Media. NBC News' Tom Brokaw and ABC anchor Peter Jennings both bashed Internet bloggers and supported Dan Rather's style of broadcasting false news. Brokaw compared the bloggers' attacks on Rather's "60 Minutes II" report about President Bush to a "political jihad." (Wonder who wrote that script for him?)
"What I think is highly inappropriate is what's going on across the Internet, a kind of political jihad," Brokaw said. "It is certainly an attempt to demonize CBS News, and it goes well beyond any factual information a lot of them has, the kind of demagoguery that is unleashed out there."
Factual information concerning the forged documents used by CBS to help throw the election in favor of Kerry is available for all to read.
And, while we're on the subject of media bias: Some of the paid mannequin news readers commented that President Bush "made faces" during the first debate. Yes, he did -- and for good reason. Most of us out here in flyover country saw that as an understandable reaction to all the ridiculous babble Kerry was spewing. One enterprising blogger put it in proper context for all to see. Enjoy.
Oh . . . and Walter, Dan, Tom and Peter . . . . Good Night.
Media's left slant is costing them. That's a safeguard. Liberal "journalists" are on their way out.
Bloggers nailed Rather.
CBS is hushing itself.
In the debate, Bush made faces as a reaction to all the ridiculous babble Kerry was spewing.
Note: New Media = Internet = Bloggers = Freepers. Cronkite called us scandalmongers. Brokaw called our work demagoguery and "political jihad".
Interesting. I noticed Brokaw had one of the founders of Powerline and another blog on TV following the VP debate the other nite. Looks like he's trying to consolidate the MSM with the new media. What a joke.
You mean this Walter Cronkite?
The Pajamahadeen have changed the world more than Johannes Guttenberg did with the first printing press in 1450.
MSM, TV etc is run by a bunch of fags, neocons, deviates, perverts, socialist and leftist. I figure at the rate we use our TV, it'll last another 20 years. It's already 12 years old.
You forgot to mention ABC. Halpern just stepped in it with the bias memo.
But they will try to force us to watch and buy--you wait, some dimbulb rat will propose legislation banning boycotts by "right-wing extremists" under the alleged authority of interstate commerce.
Of course! Now they have to go out and get jobs!
We can also challenge their licenses. The "public airwaves" are being misused. Offering only slanted news fails the public interest test.
What a perfect metaphor for the Stone-age press distorting the truth for all the world to see. Just like last weeks debate where the moderator wanted to become the story and asking anti-Bush question after question. Starting Yaaawn with, would you be a better President? Whats he going to say no? Then Mr. Hate your guts President, explain your failed War! Here in a Town hall debate Charlie Glibson helps Yaawn clarify one question and then tries to corner President Bush with Charlies follow-up he had been laying in wait for.
The proud Republican looked at the Ratherforged Danosaur holding the Gate with all of his weight, trying to pin Capitalism in its box. spewing its vile flames. The young strapping cowboy sized up the situation and decided if your are going to keep that Gate closed, I will turn my steed out the Internets Gate and talk to the American People directly. He has those rare instincts of a normal person to say, if your not going to let me get my message out; then I will go talk to my people my way. What a perfect metaphor for the dying mediaCrats of the Old NY Times and ABDNCBS and Ws way of leading.
And what a message he gave! Not only did he defeat the media, he fileted Yaawn with the skill of a Champion Bass Fisherman. He turned to the people with arm extended and said, Tell Tony Blair, your going it alone, tell Berlusconi, your going it alone, tell the President of Poland Kwasniewski, your going it alone..You Cant Lead a coalition that way! Game, set.....
That was a rhetorical moment for all times.
This debate will go down as one of the Great Debates of this country. President Bush not only defeated and exposed Yaaawn Tax & Carry for the Liberal he is but exposed the press to the American People. He was masterful in his delivery and his answers were complete and from the heart. This President has one of the most complex minds that has occupied that office since Lincoln. I would say Ronald Reagan, but Yaaawn seems to mention RR at least 10 times per debate trying to sound Conservative even though he hated Reagan.
From that moment on you could see that Kerry was done. Searching for ideas and numerous times unable to come up with words. His answers were disjointed syntax and not on topic add to that his turning from the audience to lecture and dress down The President of The United States on his failed policies was way over the top.
His worst answer of all, was his answer on abortion. The beautiful young lady with the angelic face asked a question from her heart about the need to end Partial Birth Abortion? Yaawn attempts to answer it by saying he was in Vietna....no that he was a Catholic and an Alter Boy? What does being an alter boy have to do with abortion?? He fished for Dingbats work with Planned Abortionhood and then after W answered it so clearly and compassionately, Yaawn has to have a follow-up?? Why would anyone need to have a follow-up on abortion?? Abortion is not an issue that you debate with your mind. Either you believe it is a baby and death or you dont.
What a night and what an answer to Prayers. GW showed the country and the world why we Bushbots love him like only one other President, his mentor; who must have that twinkling little eye and that rosy smile, President Ronald Wilson Reagan.
Pray for W and Our Troops
Great post, Maceman. That puts Cronkite in his place -- elsewhere.
I junked my TV back in the 50's. My kids then took music, art, etc. Big difference. I not miss it now, except for things like the debates.
It is not encroaching on the first amendment to conduct an investigation of a forged government document and a slandered, deceased military officer.
Those are illegal acts whenever you find them irrespective of their source.
I hope after President Bush wins re-election that he takes on the media through Congress. I don't see how after the way their biased treatment of him has been exposed this time around,anyone could blame him,and he'd be doing future conservative/Republican candidates a mighty good turn.
Defund the liberal news media. Don't consume their products or the products of their sponsors.
Whether or not he takes on the media, I do think they should pursue the illegal act of forgery of government documents.
Because a minister is exempt from revealing the confidence of a penitent, does that mean he can rob a bank?
Nor can a network, just because it has freedom of the press protection, commit criminal forgery.
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.