The 'Media Party' is over (CBS' downfall is just the tip of the iceberg)

MSNBC ^ | Updated: 5:12 p.m. ET Jan. 11, 2005 | By Howard Fineman

[I Gig Gar]

WASHINGTON - A political party is dying before our eyes — and I don't mean the Democrats. I'm talking about the "mainstream media," which is being destroyed by the opposition (or worse, the casual disdain) of George Bush's Republican Party; by competition from other news outlets (led by the internet and Fox's canny Roger Ailes); and by its own fraying journalistic standards. At the height of its power, the AMMP (the American Mainstream Media Party) helped validate the civil rights movement, end a war and oust a power-mad president. But all that is ancient history.

Now the AMMP is reeling, and not just from the humiliation of CBS News. We have a president who feels it's almost a point of honor not to hold more press conferences — he's held far fewer than any modern predecessor — and doesn't seem to agree that the media has any "right" to know what's really going in inside his administration. The AMMP, meanwhile, is regarded with ever growing suspicion by American voters, viewers and readers, who increasingly turn for information and analysis only to non-AMMP outlets that tend to reinforce the sectarian views of discrete slices of the electorate.

Yes, I know: A purely objective viewpoint does not exist in the cosmos or in politics. Yes, I know: Today's media foodfights are mild compared with the viciousness of pamphleteers and partisan newspapers of old, from colonial times forward. Yes, I know: The notion of a neutral "mainstream" national media gained a dominant following only in World War II and in its aftermath, when what turned out to be a temporary moderate consensus came to govern the country.

[Earthdweller]

Thank you for validating what we already knew to be true. We now get our news from world wide sources.

I will miss the old days when I was spoon fed my news from one or two snobbish arrogant elitists that knew what was good for me.

It was easier in the old days when us ignorant Americans didn't know how to think for ourselves. Maybe we should still consider looking to Hollywood and all the Michael Moores to tell us what to think. Yah think?(sarcasm off)

[NutCrackerBoy]

Doesn't matter how many replies or when it was posted. You have no reason to flame me. What harm did I do? The originator said it was an honest mistake.

You call it being a thread nanny...I call it volunteering some time to improve the quality of FR.

[Borges]

There is a certain sadness in this. America has always stood above the fray of other countries' media by having a media that was, at least in perception, unbiased. In a generation or so is all media in the U.S. going to be like one big Crossfire shouting match? Part of me hopes a new MSM rises in the place of the old one that corrects past defects.

[onyx]

The originator is NEW here.

How nice of you to scold him/her
about a duplicate posting when, in fact,
duplicates are permitted here dependent
upon the time between the postings.

[Spok]

"We have a president who feels it's almost a point of honor not to hold more press conferences"

We watched Clinton's press conferences become essentially cheerleading sessions with miscreants taken personally to the woodshed by the President, while GWB's press conferences are hostile confrontations packed with leading questions and cynical presumptions. Good riddance.

[UB355]

index

[NutCrackerBoy]

Tone down the hostility. You call it scolding to write "already posted here" ?? I call it information.

Separately, honest question: Would you intentionally repost a thread just because the 12 hours had elapsed? In that situation, I always find the old thread, and post a new reply to it.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

There is a certain sadness in this. America has always stood above the fray of other countries' media by having a media that was, at least in perception, unbiased. In a generation or so is all media in the U.S. going to be like one big Crossfire shouting match? Part of me hopes a new MSM rises in the place of the old one that corrects past defects.

There, there, it's all right . . . you don't really have to think for yourself, just read only my postings on FR here and don't bother your poor little head with considering the possibility that I might be wrong! As long as you don't do any reading other than what I post, I will assure you that I am right, and all will be right with the world! </sarcasm>

[EllaMinnow]

I missed the previous posting of this aticle, so I'm glad you posted it, or I would have missed this:

In this situation, the last thing the AMMP needed was to aim wildly at the president — and not only miss, but be seen as having a political motivation in attacking in the first place. Were Dan Rather and Mary Mapes after the truth or victory when they broadcast their egregiously sloppy story about Bush's National Guard Service? The moment it made air it began to fall apart, and eventually was shredded by factions within the AMMP itself, conservative national outlets and by the new opposition party that is emerging: The Blogger Nation. It's hard to know now who, if anyone, in the "media" has any credibility.

[onyx]

I call it volunteering some time to improve the quality of FR.

We have mods for this.

No, I do NOT intentionally post duplicates.
You have still refused to acknowledge that duplicate
postings are permitted and welcomed after a period
of time has elapsed between the first posting.

In the case of this article, it was posted YESTERDAY,
thus "I" and a whole lot of others would have missed
it, had the new FReeper not posted it.

[CFC__VRWC]

Now the AMMP is reeling, and not just from the humiliation of CBS News. We have a president who feels it's almost a point of honor not to hold more press conferences — he's held far fewer than any modern predecessor — and doesn't seem to agree that the media has any "right" to know what's really going in inside his administration.

Every time he holds a press conference he gets mugged from all sides with openly pointed, hateful questions that may not even have anything to do with the subject at hand. Everything he says gets distorted and smeared and presented to the public in purple "scare the bejeezus out of them" prose.

The media personally treats him with more disdain and outright contempt than they would show many serial child murderers. The media openly went into the tank for his opponent during the last election, completely throwing away any pretense of objectivity yet still refusing to admit they were showing any kind of "bias."

They supported his opponent to the point where they dragged his TANG service into the arena for a fourth (or fifth, I lost count) time, this time using amateurish forged documents because that was all they had and their desperation to take Bush down had reached a fever pitch. And too this day they flatly refuse to apologize for that, and actually cling to the belief that the documents were never proven to be fake, and even if they were they were still "true."

Considering all of that, Fineman ought to be grateful that President Bush gives them even as much as he does now. If I were the president, I would have thrown all their sorry asses off the White House grounds a long time ago, telling them that they could return once they learned some professionalism. Yet another reason why he is the President.

[onyx]

A quick perusal of your forum page tells me I am correct:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/user-posts?id=113828
You do act as thread nanny on a regular and repeated basis.
I count 13 "already posted here's" and I may have missed some.
And that's only on your first forum page.

[I Gig Gar]

What's the difference in our searches?

I punched the title of this thread into the search feature and got nothing.

???

[onyx]

In the little box, you have a choice between

"by title score" or "by title date"

I chose "by title date" (not knowing the definition of the other...lol.


By the way, WELCOME TO FREE REPUBLIC!

[<1/1,000,000th%]

At the height of its power, the AMMP (the American Mainstream Media Party) helped validate the civil rights movement, end a war and oust a power-mad president.

They ignore the Republicans civil rights proposals in the '50's. Also I thought FDR died and clinton served out his term. Who writes this crap? /sarcasm

[I Gig Gar]

Ooooooooooh!! I see now.

Mine was set on "Keyword". I changed it to "Date" and ONLY mine showed-up, not the original. (Maybe that's because it only searched today's date?)

Then I changed it to "Score" and both showed-up, plus a bunch of others that look like they got picked-up based on the individual words within the search. That seems like the way to go.


Thanks for the welcome!!

[I Gig Gar]

Oh, by the way...

I tried to post this article into the "Politics" side bar I have...But it didn't work (I have NO idea where it DID post).

Any tips?

[onyx]

Under the "choose"
an array of choices will appear.
Select the one most appropriate.

[I Gig Gar]

Thanks! But...

I did that (It forces you to do it), but nowhere is "Politics" listed (So I chose "Politics/Elections", but it did not show up in my "Politics" side bar.)

I also chose "Extended News" but it did not show up there, either.

Odd...

[LS]

Well, read the article carefully. He doesn't get it at all. He doesn't see that toppling the "power mad" Nixon sealed the doom of millions of South Vietnamese; or that the defeat in Vietnam ensured a longer Cold War. Fineman still thinks Reagan was a clever actor---notice, no real ideas or policies here!---and that it was the "media" that took Clinton apart, not Clinton's own criminal activities.

Further, Fineman still doesn't get that the MSM is not a "party," but is a WING of the Dem Party.

So, yes, we are happy that the MSM is collapsing, but Fineman still is clueless as to why.