Replies

I didn't dwell on airbags because the objective AP news story didn't mention them.. and the PR release they copied didn't. That is probably due to the publicity about airbags impact on smaller people. Those PR releases are PR driven, not factually driven.

Since we agree on the MSM, how do we effectively deal with them? When Dan Rat.her lied about Bush a FReeper succeeded in correcting that story. But most of the lies are not that dramatic and blatant. They are just a constant stream of "conventional wisdom" that keeps us constantly on the defensive, rather than the offensive.

Of course, there are several "Accuracy in media" groups. Why are they not more effective? Is there something FReepers can do to make them more effective? Is there a need for some new approach if the existing approaches are only successful on rare occasions?

We should do our part, of course, to increase accuracy in media. But we have to be careful, or we descend to the level of picking nits. It is one thing to mention a minor inaccuracy in passing and another to beat it to death.

For the MSM to slam bloggers as non-journalists is really stupidity compounded. By doing this, the MSM is arrogating unto themselves the high priesthood of news reporting. And, more importantly, it encourages the bloggers to do all they can to shove MSMs' feet into their collective mouths up to their armpits with no holds barred.

The reason, I think, that some of the MSM (Wash. Times) are exempted from rough treatment by the bloggers, is they have accepted the bloggers as legit. Don't expect this to happen at the NY Times anytime soon.