Skip to comments.What's So Bad about the JournoList?
Posted on 07/23/2010 12:38:29 PM PDT by Smogger
Tucker Carlson has this to say about the title question:
We're not contesting the right of anyone, journalist or not, to have political opinions. (I, for one, have made a pretty good living expressing mine.) What we object to is partisanship, which is by its nature dishonest, a species of intellectual corruption. Again and again, we discovered members of Journolist working to coordinate talking points on behalf of Democratic politicians, principally Barack Obama. That is not journalism, and those who engage in it are not journalists. They should stop pretending to be. The news organizations they work for should stop pretending, too.
I disagree with part of this. Partisanship is not "by its nature dishonest, a species of intellectual corruption." Partisanship for the sake of partisanship is indeed corrupt - e.g. Tammany-style patronage politics - but partisanship that comes about because of big, important differences on issues that matter is not. American democracy is unthinkable without the two political parties, so partisanship can't be all bad.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
I love Jay Cost.
It is the pretense of impartiality the Lefty media portrays that is the problem.
No one cares that Rachel Maddow espouses leftist view points. She is not pretending to be objective. It’s when Tom Brokaw, Charles Gibson, Katie Couric and the writers for the NY Times pretend to be impartial - that’s where the damage is done.
In a perfect French Revolution sort of world, journalists would be the first to get a really close haircut, followed by politicians and then lawyers and judges.
>>>What’s So Bad about the JournoList?
It’s a bunch of holier than thou elitists putting on a public face of objectivity and non-partisanship on one hand while the other hand was anything but objective and non-partisan. That’s what’s so bad about the JournoList.
A conspiracy to deliberately spread lies.
What could be wrong?
All you have to do is listen to the Montages Rush put on. The Journolists Parrot the DNC.
This would have been helpful during his adamant defense of Clinton during impeachment.
There’s nothing wrong with Journolist as long as MSM admits it’s pure propaganda and stops trying to pass itself off as objective journalism.
That's the heinous part of the news media. They fed lies to the public by presenting themselves as journalists, and not propagandists.
When they got caught they just went and started a new list:
Its a conspiracy by liberal journalists to kill your first amendment rights. Thats what.
If you sell me a cat and call it a horse, you're a fraud and I'm an idiot.
I just object to these hacks calling themselves journalists and their implied assumptions about me.
Are you saying that in a real Perfect world, all these people would be executed? Sentenced to death? Why?
He has taken Tucker out of context. Clearly Tucker was talking about people who were purporting to engage in journalism.
Putting Tucker back in context: Partisanship, while cloaking oneself in the mantle of unbiased journalism, is by its nature dishonest, a species of intellectual corruption.
Saw your homepage...good stuff. Also saw the Benelli....I’m a Mossberg man myself, mainly because of price. Have you looked at the Knoxx shock absorber stocks? They drop the recoil a pantload! I’ve got at least 5 shotguns with them.....great kickback reducer... you just gotta make sure your trigger guard has about an inch’s worth room in it when the recoil is absorbed...
A openly partisan press is not necessarily objectionable. What is highly objectionable is a partisan press passing themselves off as unbiased. Thus, I do not "love Jay Cost".
Intellectual subversion on a wholesale scale is no worse than planting explosives in a crowded train or building. Of course I am!
Because there an no good journalists, politicians, lawyers, and judges, right?
Ya might want to take a look at what Stalin did to secure power. You’d have fit right in.
"If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world, but I am sure we would be getting reports from Hell before breakfast."
Can't happen. Obama has beaten everyone to it. Go back to Polyannaville....
Nope. He’s working on it, but people aren’t being sent to camps en mass. Yet.
And believe me, I live far from Polyannaville. You, however, definitely live in nustoland if you really think all journalists, politicians, lawyers, and judges should be killed. Seriously, that’s INSANE.
Who could forget the word........gravitas.........
Agree news isn’t about opinions it’s about facts to bad they don’t report them.
Then you’re a dangerous fanatic. You don’t murder whole groups of people for expressing opinions. It’s un-American.
Part of the problem is that the Rathers and Courics are allowed to label themselves as “objective”. This word has no meaning, it’s just a marketing term now.
I remember that one. They are so obvious. I think they get a fax every day from DNC telling them the talking point to hit.
Carlson is right - if they want to hold and even espouse their opinions, fine. Doing under the guise of impartial journalists is fraud.
Substitute the players and industry - say it was brokers and advisors using back-channel listservs, chatting up (or talking down) companies they favor (or don’t), then going out to their clients and pitching them on their favorite investment ideas, regardless of the underlying facts and risks. If found out by the regulators, they’d go to jail and their employers would face sanction and fines.
This should be a much bigger national story than it is but, then again, that would require they report on themselves.
And you are a blooming idiot who leaps to generalized Plotanna conclusions.
What is a “Plotanna conclusion”?
You say you want to execute whole classes of people for the opinions they hold. I conclude you are a dangerous fanatic. That’s not a leap - that’s the *definition* of a fanatic.
Sorry, Gaffer - you’re wrong about this. Luckily, America will never let people with your particular belief be in charge. That’s what the Constitution is all about. We don’t slaughter each other over policy differences. We use the ballot box instead.
The problem with those like Gwen Ifill and Jim Lehrer, is they are getting paid to spread their liberalism by we the taxpayers. I don't give a rats rear end about the fools over on CNN or MSNBC, at least my taxpayer money is not funding that garbage. It's people like Ifill and Lehrer that I have a problem with.
Yeah. Like a full and open disclosure. He should be required to wear a wife-beater shirt with "I'm a Democrat" in large bold font emblazoned across his scrawny chest.
My husband has been spending an unGodly number of hours working lately and has not the time to follow the news.
I was telling him about JournoList this evening and brought up the very point you’ve just made. We should not rest until are tax dollars are cut off from these propagandists. NPR being my #1 target.
It should become priority one after The Rookie has been impeached by a Republican-controlled Congress.
You say 'opinions they hold' yet you neglect the systemmatic devolution of our society by their willing collusion to bring it down [these are 'actions' by the way - not 'opinions'].
They are active in every area: education, health, legislation, litigation and taxation, and even voting, for which you hold so much hope despite massive overt fraud. I don't know how much more of an assault on freedom such as this you can ignore and call 'opinion'.
Regardless, you have your opinions and I have mine. I do not, nor will not advocate wholesale slaughter despite your leap to think so over a figurative comment. All I am saying is that we should take note of the historic revolution and hold these people accountable in a manner that brings justice, not the perverted justice meted out today by liberals.
I have no idea what “nutstoland is, either. It looks like a typo for “nutsoland,” which *someone other than me* must have typed. I STILL want to know what a “Plotanna conclusion” is - I googled the term and can find no reference to it.
They are “active in every area” because your fellow citizens agree with them, in many cases. What you call “their willing collusion to bring it down” is what THEY believe the Tea Party wants to do - bring down the whole system of taxes and the system of government involvement that THEY want, and that is actually in place right now. THEY see the Tea Party as the threat to the society they live in.
There is, apparently, a large percentage of people who actually support these ideas. I know - I live in a state FULL of them. They are intelligent, rational, patriotic people who see things very differently, and emphasize different points of view. I argue with them, and can get them to change their points of view, but not by insulting them and calling them traitors.
You know that I have never heard ONE of my Liberal customers or neighbors say that all Conservatives should be executed.
You cited the French Revolution as if it were a good thing. Do a bit of reading on the Terror that followed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reign_of_Terror
Most of the original Revolutionaries, including Danton and Desmoulins, were guillotined because they weren’t ideologically pure enough. It was their old comrade Robespierre who condemned them saying, “Terror is nothing else than swift, severe, indomitable justice; it flows, then, from virtue.” Do you agree with him?
(Robespierre and 21 of his close friends were executed a year later, in the revolt *against* the French Revolution.
History has shown over and over and over that the manner of “justice” that you have called for is doomed to failure. People always rise up against a tyranny of “correct point of view” that enforces itself with blood. That is what you are calling for in your sweeping condemnation of people for, yes, their opinions and the way they choose to live those out.
Why don’t you try convincing people you disagree with of their errors? You don’t need to convince anybody on FR about the evils of socialism or the need to ensure individual liberty. Try some other forum where the Libs gather.