Posted on 07/23/2010 11:54:37 PM PDT by Def Conservative
Today's journalism scandal involving liberal media members of the invitation-only "Journolist" listserv discussing ways to help 2008 presidential candidate Barack Obama or discredit his press critics is far more organized than the Clinton era "vast right-wing media conspiracy," according to former Clinton aides.
While the two media conspiracies have been compared since the listserv E-mails started appearing on the Daily Caller website, former Clinton aides say that there is one major difference between the two. Unlike the current scandal, reporters with conservative media back in the 1990s were competitive and didn't share story ideas.
What's more, the Journolist affair threatens to further undermine media credibility, especially with Republican organizations who tell us that they are reconsidering their relationship with reporters and news organizations on the Journolist listserv that was taken down when it became public.
"Do I think that there are potential issues with that if you get people trying to take particular positions and organize them because that ultimately undermines the objectivity of the media and the sense of independence, yeah," says former Clinton aide Chris Lehane.
(Excerpt) Read more at politics.usnews.com ...
Don’t get me wrong; I don’t believe Lehane. But the JournoList is something that actually happened/is happening. The VRWC was only alleged or from the mind of loony liberals.
The question isn't whether or not they were coordinating “NEWS”, but how long have they been coordinating the “NEWS”.
I have first hand knowledge the Rodney King story in 1991/92 was orchestrated to make the repubs. look bad and cover up for the dems, corruption.
Let’s hope Chelsea doesn’t decide to pick up the mantle of her parents - one generation of marxist Clinton’s has been ENOUGH!!!
Oh yea mean those “f*cking Jews!!” Hillary screeched about? lol.
Well, if her highness needs to get liberal Jews back on the reservation she has a big problem.
They won’t do it because of Israel (most of them hate Israel with a passion) and they won’t do it because Obama is kissing too much Muslim rear-end. This may be their excuse but the real reason will be Obama failing to push forth the liberal plan of turning this country into a socialist/communist nation.
If they believe Hillary gives them a better shot at their socialist utopia they’ll get behind her again. If she fails to convince them of her ability to do this, they’ll look for the next history making candidate or simply stick with the anointed one.
In the end liberal Jews for the most part love to play at being Jewish but in the end would rather worship Marx/Lenin then the God of Abraham!
Informed Hillary supporters are still ticked off at how Hillary was treated during the campaign and how it was stolen from her. Uninformed former Hillary supporters were so wrapped up in making history by electing a black liberal President, they’ve forgotten their initial support of her.
It’s almost comical to think about it. When Hillary was forced to tell her supporters to get behind and support Obama (which she did quite credibly though it had to be eating her alive) she peeled off a good number of quasi-informed Dem voters. The ones who pay little attention to what goes on politically until right before the primaries and still give Obama high marks for running the country.
If Obama runs in 2014 how does she get them back?
How does she destroy Obama if he does run without damaging the Dems and ticking of those that support him?
To bad this soap opera is destroying our nation. A good screenwriter could put out one hell of a movie if the consequences were not so damned serious.
The problem you describe came about as broadcast media came of age. The timeline is identical. Along about the same time small newspapers were being bought up by large conglomerates. These days small independent newspapers are scarce as hen's teeth. It started first with radio networks. Guys like David Sarnoff at RCA controlled the airwaves. Then, as television came along media was further consolidated into essentially 3 major outlets. People gradually stopped reading newspapers and began getting their news from the "big three". Uncle Walter was born. Eventually, we saw competing newspapers in larger cities, the one semblance of balance in media, fall one by one. The result was as you describe.
The Genie (the Internet) is out of the bottle, though, and the Ivy Leaguer's suddenly don't like it at all. There are now hundreds of sources of information beyond the big networks. The "big three" are losing viewers and listeners at staggering pace and they know it. Listen to all the cat calls to shut down the "new media" and the blogosphere coming out of mainstream media. If they could compete with ideas they would, but they can't. History and facts aren't on their side, hence the charade they've been putting up for decades. If you listen closely you'll hear the big media tell you exactly who threatens them the most......
We had heard she was going to study medicine when she entered Stanford, be a cardiologist (helpful to Billy Jeff it would have been, eh?), but she did not follow on that, I know she changed majors, course of study. I don't recall at the mo', Poly Sci or Law, I think it was Law. Something tells me she is looking toward living off the taxpayers the same as the grifters.
Yep...and it will be interesting to watch what happens if the PUMAs and the Obama cultists collide again. The PUMAs are much smarter about Obama’s minions and their tactics than they were in ‘08.
At this point, I have no idea with whom I would place my money.
Right now it’s Obama + 1...simply because he and his community organizing union thugs blindsided her last go around.
This time, I think I will be popping popcorn...
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.