Posted on 03/19/2009 3:43:44 PM PDT by abb
By the way, is "elite opinion-makers" just a duplicitous way of saying "propagandists"?
The author of this nonsense is paying NO attention to the basic reason for people turning their backs on what he claims is journalism.
When the “journalism schools” began to turn out extreme left-wing and leftists “journalists” their papers firt angered then disgusted their readers. I personally await the death and burial of the Boston Globe, a newspaper that at one time was the ‘beginning of my day.’
When the Democrat President, Johnson, vastly expanded the war in Vietman, the PRESS, heady from its VICTORY over the hated Richard Nixon, rapidly took on a virulent anti-American position.
Each even was covered in a way to show the USA in the worst possible light. Atrocities committed by the communists was ignored, while the least tragedy involving American troops was trumpeted with a disgusting glee.
From then through the Iraq War, every utterance and rant by a “peace activist” was prominently featured in the press, while any statement in support of American efforts were scornfully dismissed at “war mongering rants”
It continues to this very day, a biased, slanted, and lying media, feeling the onset of the fatal heart attack even while doing daily those things that will ensure their own death.
Sir, stop whining.
Once again, proof of my assertion that they are more upset with losing their monopoly power than their jobs.
Yep the papers are in trouble. But, haven’t there been continual changes in the news and media business since at least the end of World War II? For example, most cities used to have morning papers and an afternoon paper. I can remember in the ‘50s and ‘60s a lot of afternoon papers went out of business. Magazines such as Life, Look, and the Saturday Evening Post lost readership and went out of business.
Didn’t New York used to have six or more daily papers, but many went under after a newspaper strike in the ‘60s?
Newspapers and the media in general have gone through changes in the past, and will have to adapt today if they are going to survive. Some of what they face they brought on themselves. Some of it is just new technology taking us to new places. Should we have given a subsidy to all those afternoon newspapers that went out of business years ago? Should we have subdidized Look Magazine?
And what should we do with young people today, who would rather watch Jon Stewart’s news satires than read an actual newspaper?
“....propaganda for the liberals in power and spew hate if a perceived conservative is in power.”
Excellent point, and they turn on a dime when their side wins or loses.
I tried to wade through this seemingly interminable article. I understand the negative impact of focusing primarily on making money as opposed to providing responsible journalism. I was feeling that it was getting to be about time to mention the absolutely biased, left leaning reporting of events that has fouled the media.
That change from reporting to opinion shaping is the primary reason that I have no confidence in the MSM, especially rags like the N.Y. Times or the L.A. Times.
Just about the time that it began to register on me that this was a very, very long piece, I arrived at the part where the recommendation is that the government take over the newspapers.
The government? I thought that the government already had taken over the news. I certainly don’t want to legitimize that sureptitious arrangement. I would just as soon have these brainwashed excuses for journalists go and get a real job. Maybe working at Micky D’s?
All our enegies sould probably be directed to preventing the government from taking control of the internet. That effort is probably underway right now. I sure hope I don’t jeopordize any ships with these comments.
Let them die.
Yep.
The Obama candidacy was like a gift presented on a golden platter to the nation's newspapers and their alleged "investigative journalists". They could have had front page exposes on Dumbo's associations with the terrorist William Ayers and his wife; stories about his "community organizing" days; something (anything!) about his early life and influences; serious investigation into his Kenyan roots, atheist mother, early schooling in Indonesia (was he raised a Muslim?), and his college days.
Was Dumbo really born in Hawaii, and why is he working so hard to keep his birth certificate from public scrutiny?
What about that drug use he admitted to in his autobiography? Was it more extensive than he would want people to believe? (Maybe they could have dug up some friends and associates from that time?) What were Dumbo's true connections to Rahm Emanuel, Rod Blogojevich, and the rest of Chicago's political mobsters and their corrupt machine?
And of course, there was the Reverend Wright...
But the newspapers ignored - - no, they spiked - - any reporting that could conceivably have a negative impact on their candidate, leaving the discussions about all these topics to...
...the internet, cable news pundits, and talk radio.
It was as if the newspapers were trying to commit suicide. Clearly, the most important thing to them was to get their candidate elected even if they died trying. And maybe they did.
...Which is fine with me. Good riddance to bad garbage.
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.