Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sea Hag: Who You Calling A Journalist?
The Boston Channel.com ^ | April 13, 2005 | Helen Thomas

Posted on 04/15/2005 12:39:33 PM PDT by presidio9

Who is a journalist?

That is the question that Jeff Gannon, alias James Guckert, asked in his own defense during a National Press Club panel last week.

The club sponsored the discussion to illuminate the differences between legitimate journalists and bloggers -- or imposters.

Gannon and a couple of bloggers were on the panel.

Gannon made news recently after some liberal bloggers began investigating him when he asked President George W. Bush a question that had as its premise the assertion that congressional Democrats were "divorced from reality."

Bush comes to his rare news conferences armed with a list of reporters his staff has designated for him to call on. In giving Gannon the nod, he passed over some of the regular White House journalists -- including yours truly -- all with our hands up.

Gannon had attended White House briefings over a two-year period by getting a regular flow of one-day press passes that allowed him to enter the White House grounds. He did not qualify for a permanent White House press pass or a congressional press pass because he failed to meet the accreditation rules, which include the requirement that the applicant work for a news publication or broadcast outlet.

Gannon was known in the press room for asking softball, right-leaning questions. The digging bloggers revealed him to be a Republican operative, employed by the Talon News Web site, run by volunteer GOP activists and linked to GOSPUSA, a Republican consulting group, owned by Bobby Eberle of Houston.

Once that was established, questions arose as to why he was allowed to attend the daily press sessions.

Gannon complained that he had been targeted by liberal bloggers who did not like his "pro-administration" questions and argued that the harsh treatment he was getting in the mainstream media would have a "chilling" effect on other conservatives in the media.

"I was about the only news source providing ... information without a filter," he said in defending his use of White House press releases verbatim in his so-called "news" reports.

"There is nothing wrong with reporting what the administration says about a particular issue," he said. "Why does everything have to be looked at through a lens that represents every point of view?"

In the ensuing hullabaloo, Gannon resigned from Talon, telling Editor & Publisher magazine -- a news industry trade publication -- that he felt he was a "legitimate" correspondent.

One does wonder where the lines are these days that distinguish between legitimate reporters and anyone who has a laptop computer or a Web site.

Where do the bloggers fit in? They may have something to say -- and nobody is stopping them. Still, the description "journalist" does not apply to what they do.

Edward Wasserman, a professor of journalism at Washington & Lee University, defines a journalist as someone who "is professionally dedicated to truth seeking." He conceded that although the whole job description "has gotten muddied," Gannon shouldn't be considered a journalist.

Gannon was a propagandist, a flack for the White House. Thus, he fails to meet the requirement -- as Wasserman wrote in the Miami Herald last September -- that "anybody who enters the (journalism) profession makes a core commitment to do his or her best to determine and tell the truth."

Tom Rosenstiel, head of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, said the proper question is not whether you call yourself a journalist, but whether your work constitutes journalism.

"A journalist tries to get the facts right" and tries to get close to a "verifiable truth," not to take sides but "to inspire public discussion," he said.

This isn't a requirement for bloggers with axes to grind.

Professional reporters and editors are trained to understand the need for neutrality in straight news stories. They also have been trained in the ethics that distinguish their profession.

It's in the nature of our work that the public has every opportunity to scrutinize what we do. No one lasts long in the news business if there are deliberate distortions of the news.

The late Martha Gellhorn, a legendary foreign correspondent, said: "In all my reporting life, I have thrown small pebbles into a very large pond, and ... have no way of knowing whether any pebble caused the slightest ripple. I don't need to worry about that. My responsibility was the effort."

Fortunately, most newspapers in this country are still devoted to delivering impartial news stories. The editors and publishers see it as an indispensable public service.

(Helen Thomas can be reached at the e-mail address hthomas@hearstdc.com).


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: bias; devitopenguin; hatefulbitch; helenthomas; kerrylostgetoverit; leftwingmedia; liberal; propagandist; seahag; yourenotajournalist

1 posted on 04/15/2005 12:39:33 PM PDT by presidio9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: presidio9

When women reach that quality of beauty, I wonder why they even wear makeup!


2 posted on 04/15/2005 12:42:26 PM PDT by struggle ((The struggle continues))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

3 posted on 04/15/2005 12:42:34 PM PDT by presidio9 (Islam Is As Islam Does)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: struggle

4 posted on 04/15/2005 12:43:22 PM PDT by presidio9 (Islam Is As Islam Does)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
"A journalist tries to get the facts right"

That leaves Helen out of being called a journalist then because what she writes is opinion not facts.

5 posted on 04/15/2005 12:46:41 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Dear Helen Thomas:

Not only are you stupid, but you are also, no doubt, ugly. I would venture to say that you are so ugly, both in mind, soul and outward appearance as to be revolting to the sight. Gut-wrenching, barf-bag filling, hang-a-pork-chop-around-your-neck-to-get-the-dog-to-play-with-you ugly. Mind-numbingly ugly. So ugly that you could look the medusa square in the eye and turn HER into stone. Naw, I bet you're even uglier than that. So ugly that in comparison to your visage, a bucket-full of penguine crap would be regarded as an artful masterpiece. Monumentally ugly. So ugly that If I had to look directly at you, my autonomic reflexes would cause me to soil my drawers. Worse - if your dead, decrepid corpse was fed into a tree-chipper, the chipper would malfunction and barf out tree-chipper teeth. Black-holes would refuse to alow you past their event-horizon for fear of contamination. THAT's how UGLY you are.

YYYYYYYYYYAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKK!


6 posted on 04/15/2005 12:46:42 PM PDT by roaddog727 (The marginal propensity to save is 1 minus the marginal propensity to consume.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Man that puts the ug in ugly, goodbye lunch.


7 posted on 04/15/2005 12:59:23 PM PDT by CAP811 (One man can change the world with a bullet in the right place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Edward Wasserman, a professor of journalism at Washington & Lee University, defines a journalist as someone who "is professionally dedicated to truth seeking."

That definition would depopulate every MSM newsroom in America.

8 posted on 04/15/2005 12:59:34 PM PDT by okie01 (A slavering moron and proud member of the lynch mob, cleaning the Augean stables of MSM since 1998.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

HURL...cough...cough...sputter...HURL...


9 posted on 04/15/2005 1:01:48 PM PDT by MisterRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Helen Thomas was a propagandist, a flack for the Clinton White House.


10 posted on 04/15/2005 1:05:33 PM PDT by MisterRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

This whole Gannon thing is surreal.

The left went after his scalp not because he was biased, but because he was conservatively biased.

They couldn't bring him down because of that, as quoting an average press conference in full was damning counter evidence, so they invaded his "right to privacy" and gay-baited him.

Unbelievable.


11 posted on 04/15/2005 1:06:11 PM PDT by swilhelm73 (Appeasers believe that if you keep on throwing steaks to a tiger, the tiger will become a vegetarian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

"real" journalists are nuetral.

What a f'in joke.


12 posted on 04/15/2005 1:07:46 PM PDT by hemi dawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

If you post pictures you should (Barf alert).


13 posted on 04/15/2005 1:08:42 PM PDT by Navy Patriot (Show me your steenking badge before I use this shiny gun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
In giving Gannon the nod, he passed over some of the regular White House journalists -- including yours truly -- all with our hands up.

Sea Hag: WAH, WAH, I'm important! Slick Willie loved me! He snapped my thong, dammit! Who cares if I look like my face was on fire and it was put out with a screwdriver!

14 posted on 04/15/2005 1:09:13 PM PDT by frogjerk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CAP811

15 posted on 04/15/2005 1:11:36 PM PDT by presidio9 (Islam Is As Islam Does)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MisterRepublican

16 posted on 04/15/2005 1:12:32 PM PDT by presidio9 (Islam Is As Islam Does)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

17 posted on 04/15/2005 1:13:04 PM PDT by presidio9 (Islam Is As Islam Does)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

18 posted on 04/15/2005 1:14:22 PM PDT by presidio9 (Islam Is As Islam Does)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: hemi dawg

Helen Thomas has had her tiny head up her huge As* for so long, she no longer has any idea which way is up.


19 posted on 04/15/2005 1:14:40 PM PDT by hemi dawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: roaddog727

Hey, why don't we stick to the issue. What Helen Thomas looks like is beside the point. At least she didn't try to turn herself into some botoxed, facelifted Frankenstein. She may not be today's definition of beauty but then no one is naturally anymore.

As to the issue, she is wrong about journalists. By any definition she presents, 99% if not 100% of the MSM flunk. Whatever happened to the liberal notion that truth is a personal thing and not a standard by which we can judge others?

I have a bachelor's degree in journalism and I warn't never taught about ethics and searches for truth. In fact I was studying journalism during the sea change of the Nixon resignation when journalists went from reporters of fact to king-breakers. Suddenly everyone who came into journalism was a crusader out to take on the "establishment".

Helen is totally out to lunch when she assumes that "real journalists" only pursue the truth and do everything they can to stay neutral. None that I ever met tried to meet that standard and as I read and listen to the news today, I can't find anyone who also does so. In fact, it is literally impossible not to impose your own notions onto what you see and hear and pursue in the news.

As to accountability, bloggers also have accountability. If readers sense they are out to lunch, the readership goes down. So Helen is wrong there also. It isn't necessary to attack Ms. Thomas' appearance when she is so wrong already on substance. I believe bloggers have as much claim to be journalists as so-called "real journalists" and the only issue on access to the White House should be readership or impact not whether it is broadcast, print or blogging.


20 posted on 04/15/2005 1:18:17 PM PDT by caseinpoint (IMHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Edward Wasserman, a professor of journalism at Washington & Lee University, defines a journalist as someone who "is professionally dedicated to truth seeking." He conceded that although the whole job description "has gotten muddied," Gannon shouldn't be considered a journalist.

rofling. The irony in this article, of this article, is beyond belief.

21 posted on 04/15/2005 1:21:08 PM PDT by N. Beaujon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: caseinpoint
It isn't necessary to attack Ms. Thomas' appearance when she is so wrong already on substance.

But it is the substance of her face that is so disturbing!

22 posted on 04/15/2005 1:21:50 PM PDT by frogjerk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Edward Wasserman, a professor of journalism at Washington & Lee University, defines a journalist as someone who "is professionally dedicated to truth seeking."

What does that make Dan Rather then?
23 posted on 04/15/2005 1:28:56 PM PDT by Beckwith (I knew Churchill, and Ward Churchill is no Churchill . . . he ain't no Indian either . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
"A journalist tries to get the facts right" and tries to get close to a "verifiable truth," not to take sides but "to inspire public discussion," he said.

I guess the NY Times doesn't employ any journalists.

24 posted on 04/15/2005 1:31:43 PM PDT by Cowboy Bob (Question Liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Have you no sense of decency?

My monitor is now shrunken and shriveled.


25 posted on 04/15/2005 1:37:08 PM PDT by CAP811 (One man can change the world with a bullet in the right place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: presidio9


Calm down, Helen! FR isn't your ship!
26 posted on 04/15/2005 1:40:00 PM PDT by Rastus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

-In giving Gannon the nod, he passed over some of the regular White House journalists -- including yours truly -- all with our hands up.-

Maybe he didn't know you had your hand up, gorgeous. Maybe he thought it was a tumor.


27 posted on 04/15/2005 1:45:58 PM PDT by AmericanChef
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

She may stink too....


28 posted on 04/15/2005 1:53:13 PM PDT by hosepipe (This Propaganda has been edited to include not a small amount of Hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rastus

29 posted on 04/15/2005 1:56:52 PM PDT by presidio9 (Islam Is As Islam Does)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I know the photos are coming, yet I click.

Oklahoma, many years ago: a large bull snake is swallowing a sparrow but, transfixed, I cannot look away . . . the horror, the horror


30 posted on 04/15/2005 1:57:47 PM PDT by tumblindice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

That poor swabbie looks like he's about to vomit, and understandably so.

31 posted on 04/15/2005 2:03:11 PM PDT by Slings and Arrows ("The Internet, where men are men, women are men, and little girls are FBI agents..." --Unknown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk; caseinpoint

"But it is the substance of her face that is so disturbing!"

Therein lies the point.


32 posted on 04/15/2005 2:11:46 PM PDT by roaddog727 (The marginal propensity to save is 1 minus the marginal propensity to consume.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
a journalist is someone who "is professionally dedicated to truth seeking."

welll... i guess that leaves out old ratbgs out then doesn't it???

33 posted on 04/15/2005 2:47:30 PM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

I get your point but remind me never to show my own face in any Freeper company. I inherited my Dad's nose and my mom's inset eyes and I will never win a beauty contest. That's not to say I turn men to stone but let's face it, women are judged (and penalized) much more based on their appearance than are men. I guess I'm a little sensitive about it but I will certainly admit that Helen acts like her face--ugly. ;)


34 posted on 04/15/2005 2:47:36 PM PDT by caseinpoint (IMHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Slings and Arrows

I was thinking the same thing.


35 posted on 04/15/2005 2:55:21 PM PDT by presidio9 (Islam Is As Islam Does)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: caseinpoint
I guess I'm a little sensitive about it but I will certainly admit that Helen acts like her face--ugly. ;)

A smart mind can make up for beauty any day. (Sports analogies follow...) Unfortunately, in this case, this woman has a double double going against her...I mean, Helen's face looks like a kicked football at the moment of impact...

36 posted on 04/15/2005 4:34:14 PM PDT by frogjerk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Ah, dear Helen. I remember how she disrespected GWBush in his first press conference. I wrote her and complained, and the hag wrote me back! WHY is she still in the press corps? Someone should have the guts to force her to leave! She isn't a journalist... she is a columnist!


37 posted on 04/15/2005 4:36:42 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife (" It is not true that life is one damn thing after another-it's one damn thing over and over." ESV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
That was sooooooo funny!

How 'bout this one:

Image hosted by Photobucket.com

38 posted on 04/15/2005 4:40:28 PM PDT by Scothia (If you pray for rain, prepare to deal with some mud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Helen, ya puker, got some news for you _

You swine. You vulgar little maggot. You worthless bag of filth. As we say in Texas, I'll bet you couldn't pour p!ss out of a boot with instructions on the heel. You are a canker. A sore that won't go away. I would rather kiss a lawyer than be seen with you. You're a putrescent mass, a walking vomit. You are a spineless little worm deserving nothing but the profoundest contempt. You are a jerk, a cad, a weasel. Your life is a monument to stupidity. You are a stench, a revulsion, a big suck on a sour lemon. You are a bleating foal, a curdled staggering mutant dwarf smeared richly with the effluvia and offal accompanying your alleged birth into this world. An insensate, blinking calf, meaningful to nobody, abandoned by the puke-drooling, giggling beasts who sired you and then killed themselves in recognition of what they had done. I will never get over the embarrassment of belonging to the same species as you. You are a monster, an ogre, a malformity. I barf at the very thought of you. You have all the appeal of a paper cut. Lepers avoid you. You are vile, worthless, less than nothing. You are a weed, a fungus, the dregs of this earth. And did I mention you smell? Try to edit your responses of unnecessary material before attempting to impress us with your insight. The evidence that you are a nincompoop will still be available to readers, but they will be able to access it more rapidly. You snail-skulled little rabbit. Would that a hawk pick you up, drive its beak into your brain, and upon finding it rancid set you loose to fly briefly before spattering the ocean rocks with the frothy pink shame of your ignoble blood. May you choke on the queasy, convulsing nausea of your own trite, foolish beliefs. You are weary, stale, flat and unprofitable. You are grimy, squalid, nasty and profane. You are foul and disgusting. You're a fool, an ignoramus. Monkeys look down on you. Even sheep won't have sex with you. You are unreservedly pathetic, starved for attention, and lost in a land that reality forgot. And what meaning do you expect your delusionally self-important statements of unknowing, inexperienced opinion to have with us? What fantasy do you hold that you would believe that your tiny-fisted tantrums would have more weight than that of a leprous desert rat, spinning rabidly in a circle, waiting for the bite of the snake? You are a waste of flesh. You have no rhythm. You are ridiculous and obnoxious. You are the moral equivalent of a leech. You are a living emptiness, a meaningless void. You are sour and senile. You are a disease, you puerile, one-handed, slack-jawed, drooling, meatslapper. On a good day you're a half-wit. You remind me of drool. You are deficient in all that lends character. You have the personality of wallpaper. You are dank and filthy. You are asinine and benighted. You are the source of all unpleasantness. You spread misery and sorrow wherever you go. You smarmy lagerlout git. You bloody woofter sod. Bugger off, pillock. You grotty wanking oik artless base-court apple-john. You clouted boggish foot-licking twit. You dankish clack-dish plonker. You gormless crook-pated tosser. You churlish boil-brained clotpole ponce. You cockered bum-bailey poofter. You craven dewberry pisshead cockup pratting naff. You gob-kissing gleeking flap-mouthed coxcomb. You dread-bolted fobbing beef-witted clapper-clawed flirt-gill. You are a fiend and a coward, and you have bad breath. You are degenerate, noxious and depraved. I feel debased just for knowing you exist. I despise everything about you, and I wish you would go away. I cannot believe how incredibly stupid you are. I mean rock-hard stupid. Dehydrated-rock-hard stupid. Stupid, so stupid it goes way beyond the stupid we know into a whole different dimension of stupid. You are trans-stupid stupid. Meta-stupid. Stupid collapsed on itself so far that even the neutrons have collapsed. Stupid gotten so dense that no intellect can escape. Singularity stupid. Blazing hot mid-day sun on Mercury stupid. You emit more stupid in one second than our entire galaxy emits in a year. Quasar stupid. Your writing has to be a troll. Nothing in our universe can really be this stupid. Perhaps this is some primordial fragment from the original big bang of stupid. Some pure essence of a stupid so uncontaminated by anything else as to be beyond the laws of physics that we know. I'm sorry. I can't go on. This is an epiphany of stupid for me. After this, you may not hear from me again for a while. I don't have enough strength left to deride your ignorant questions and half baked comments about unimportant trivia, or any of the rest of this drivel. Duh. The only thing worse than your logic is your manners. I have snipped away most of what you wrote, because, well... it didn't really say anything. Your attempt at constructing a creative post was pitiful. I mean, really, stringing together a bunch of insults among a load of babbling was hardly effective... Maybe later in life, after you have learned to read, write, spell, and count, you will have more success. True, these are rudimentary skills that many of us "normal" people take for granted that everyone has an easy time of mastering. But we sometimes forget that there are "challenged" persons in this world who find these things more difficult. If I had known, that this was your case then I would have never read your post. It just wouldn't have been "right". Sort of like parking in a handicap space. I wish you the best of luck in the emotional, and social struggles that seem to be placing such a demand on you.
39 posted on 04/15/2005 8:18:57 PM PDT by Issaquahking (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Edward Wasserman, a professor of journalism at Washington & Lee University, defines a journalist as someone who "is professionally dedicated to truth seeking."

By that definition, I cannot think of a single journalist who calls himself one.

40 posted on 04/15/2005 8:24:01 PM PDT by Sloth (I don't post a lot of the threads you read; I make a lot of the threads you read better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Issaquahking

AH - good to see you are in full voice again. Care to come down to Naples for the 'goat trial'? I'd be willing to bet you could find inspiration for at least a few more pages of inventive invective.


41 posted on 04/15/2005 10:23:51 PM PDT by GladesGuru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Sea Hag? I thought you were talking about Moreen Dowd.


42 posted on 04/15/2005 10:25:09 PM PDT by Porterville (Down with politicians.... Down with Judicial Fiat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sloth

By that definition Diogenes would qualify as a journalist.


43 posted on 04/15/2005 10:25:13 PM PDT by GladesGuru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: GladesGuru

Here: I'll bail you out.

44 posted on 04/16/2005 1:22:09 AM PDT by presidio9 (Islam Is As Islam Does)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

If someone like that appeared at trail, it would cause a riot.

Well, at least a parade.


45 posted on 04/16/2005 9:16:45 AM PDT by GladesGuru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson