Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
September 16th, 2009 12:56 am
No Double-Standard Here
Given that its the L.A. Times, this is a surprisingly strong editorial rebuke against ACORN:
Given all the scrutiny, one would have expected ACORN to be doing everything in its power to make sure its activities were squeaky clean. Yet since the initial video was released last week showing ACORN workers in Baltimore who appeared to be aiding and abetting criminal activity, activist filmmaker James OKeefe has released two more showing similar behavior at ACORN offices in Washington and Brooklyn. The response from ACORN? Fire the workers involved and blame Fox News.
We are the boogeyman for the right-wing and its echo chambers, reads a self-serving statement released Saturday by ACORNs chief organizer, Bertha Lewis. She claimed the videos were doctored and threatened legal action against Fox. What she didnt do is apologize for the appalling and possibly illegal behavior of ACORN employees, acknowledge that the organization has serious internal problems and vow to correct them, or do what she should have done as soon as the scandal was revealed: resign.
OKeefes hidden-camera methods are distasteful, and the extent to which his videos were edited is unknown. Their content is nonetheless devastating to ACORN so much so that, on Monday, the Senate voted overwhelmingly to withhold federal housing funds from the group. Thats a shame because ACORN does worthwhile work in poor communities, helping people avoid foreclosure, giving them tax help and, yes, registering them to vote. If ACORN is to survive and retain a shred of credibility, it needs to stop deflecting blame and clean house.
I have to laugh though, at one line in the above editorial: OKeefes hidden-camera methods are distasteful, and the extent to which his videos were edited is unknown.
As opposed to every episode of 60 Minutes that have aired on CBS since the show debuted in 1968? As Jonah Goldberg wrote in early 2001, before 9/11 and the birth of the Blogosphere:
60 Minutes has used secret cameras for decades and earned awards and ratings for it. But when 60 Minutes used a hidden camera to snoop on another journalist a few years ago, heads exploded in the hallowed halls of elite journalism. Why? Because we dont do that sort of thing to our own. We only screw outsiders. Why do you think the media despised Linda Tripp so? It wasnt just that she made life for Bill Clinton so uncomfortable; she was a scab, using the very techniques that thousands of journalists use each and every day. And she did it to protect herself! Nevertheless, when a private citizen employs such tactics shes seen as an immoral betrayer of a friend. When a journalist does it, shes a news hound and an ethical one at that.
Of course that was before blogging made everyone into a potential journalist, and smashed the legacy medias guild mentality. And speaking of September 11th heres a telling anecdote. That night, there was, understandably, a news blackout around the rubble of what at the start of the day had been the World Trade Center. Beyond the risk of bodies appearing on the 6:00 PM news, very likely the New York authorities didnt want a gaggle of journalists scampering about the still smoldering rubble and debris, both slowing down rescue efforts, and risking further injury, or worse. But Diane Sawyer of ABC grabbed a cameraman and a small camcorder, and wrapped the camera with a roll of paper towels to disguise it. Wearing filter masks and goggles, they wandered into the cordoned-off area of the WTC and attempt to see what they could see, and tape what they could tape. If thats considered acceptable television journalism, then why are James OKeefes hidden-camera methods distasteful to the L.A. Times?
Is the difference merely Diane Sawyers establishment center-left politics, or does the venue a TV conglomerate whose predecessor radio network dates back over 60 years versus an upstart Website also play a factor in the Times double-standard?
Certainly wouldnt be the first time for the legacy media.
Filed under: Oh, That Liberal Media!, Radical Chic, The New Puritans, The New, New Journalism
yeah...go read non-factchecked garbage.
problem is you don't pick and choose.
The rest is just someone's opinion...not worth more or less than anyone else's.... fine for what it is. But you've always had this terrible problem with posting hem as if they had some factual weight.
the sad fact is, that's what you get in most newspapers as wellyeah...go read non-factchecked garbage.
problem is you don't pick and choose.
The rest is just someone's opinion...not worth more or less than anyone else's.... fine for what it is. But you've always had this terrible problem with posting hem as if they had some factual weight.
yes, you need multiple sources for nearly everythingBlogs are a mix of the good, the bad, and the truly ugly.
I rarely if ever use them as a source, there are just too many shills, morons, 12-year-olds pretending to be experts on everything from their parents' basement, and post-traumatic tequila hallucinators pretending to be journalists out there.
There are a few I respect and read often, mostly for news in scientific fields the MSM doesn't find sexy enough to cover. But even there, it's so important to do your homework.
yes, you need multiple sources for nearly everythingBlogs are a mix of the good, the bad, and the truly ugly.
I rarely if ever use them as a source, there are just too many shills, morons, 12-year-olds pretending to be experts on everything from their parents' basement, and post-traumatic tequila hallucinators pretending to be journalists out there.
There are a few I respect and read often, mostly for news in scientific fields the MSM doesn't find sexy enough to cover. But even there, it's so important to do your homework.
and there is still more attention given to being FIRST on a report than being CORRECT
and till that changes back, no source will have legitimacy
yeah, and bloggers are starting to do that now alsoyes, you need multiple sources for nearly everythingBlogs are a mix of the good, the bad, and the truly ugly.
I rarely if ever use them as a source, there are just too many shills, morons, 12-year-olds pretending to be experts on everything from their parents' basement, and post-traumatic tequila hallucinators pretending to be journalists out there.
There are a few I respect and read often, mostly for news in scientific fields the MSM doesn't find sexy enough to cover. But even there, it's so important to do your homework.
and there is still more attention given to being FIRST on a report than being CORRECT
and till that changes back, no source will have legitimacy
Being first is one of the ways CNN tanked. They used to be respectable, but when they started just parroting press releases verbatim and setting their talking heads to fight over it, I stopped watching them. They stopped doing any work for themselves because it took too long to verify before reading it off.
I have no respect for the MSM either. We need to get back to the days of news outlets being independent from larger corporate interests with a bigger agenda. I don't care if the MSM makes a profit, I do care who they make it for and what conflicts are involved.
yeah, and bloggers are starting to do that now alsoyes, you need multiple sources for nearly everything
and there is still more attention given to being FIRST on a report than being CORRECT
and till that changes back, no source will have legitimacy
Being first is one of the ways CNN tanked. They used to be respectable, but when they started just parroting press releases verbatim and setting their talking heads to fight over it, I stopped watching them. They stopped doing any work for themselves because it took too long to verify before reading it off.
I have no respect for the MSM either. We need to get back to the days of news outlets being independent from larger corporate interests with a bigger agenda. I don't care if the MSM makes a profit, I do care who they make it for and what conflicts are involved.
look how messed up the protesters attendance counts went
someone reports something wrong and it snowballs
true, but they are starting to fall into the same madness of wanting to be the first to report rather than waiting to be accurateyeah, and bloggers are starting to do that now alsoBeing first is one of the ways CNN tanked. They used to be respectable, but when they started just parroting press releases verbatim and setting their talking heads to fight over it, I stopped watching them. They stopped doing any work for themselves because it took too long to verify before reading it off.
I have no respect for the MSM either. We need to get back to the days of news outlets being independent from larger corporate interests with a bigger agenda. I don't care if the MSM makes a profit, I do care who they make it for and what conflicts are involved.
look how messed up the protesters attendance counts went
someone reports something wrong and it snowballs
The problem is MSM is more interested in hype and ratings. I would prefer blogs to their newscasts because at least the blogs are not dependent on readers.
yeah, and bloggers are starting to do that now alsoBeing first is one of the ways CNN tanked. They used to be respectable, but when they started just parroting press releases verbatim and setting their talking heads to fight over it, I stopped watching them. They stopped doing any work for themselves because it took too long to verify before reading it off.
I have no respect for the MSM either. We need to get back to the days of news outlets being independent from larger corporate interests with a bigger agenda. I don't care if the MSM makes a profit, I do care who they make it for and what conflicts are involved.
look how messed up the protesters attendance counts went
someone reports something wrong and it snowballs
The problem is MSM is more interested in hype and ratings. I would prefer blogs to their newscasts because at least the blogs are not dependent on readers.
also given that the internet is the best Orwellian environmentyeah, and bloggers are starting to do that now also
look how messed up the protesters attendance counts went
someone reports something wrong and it snowballs
The problem is MSM is more interested in hype and ratings. I would prefer blogs to their newscasts because at least the blogs are not dependent on readers.
No, but many of them are dependent on other things.
I could start a blog today and pretend to be an expert on anything I want just by regurgitating other unverified, regurgitated crap I find on google. Maybe I already have.
Would you believe me? Because it's on the internet and not linked to a corporate whore MSM outlet, does that mean it's true?
People can say or be anything online with little or no accountability. That alone makes me suspicious.
yeah, and bloggers are starting to do that now also
look how messed up the protesters attendance counts went
someone reports something wrong and it snowballs
The problem is MSM is more interested in hype and ratings. I would prefer blogs to their newscasts because at least the blogs are not dependent on readers.
No, but many of them are dependent on other things.
I could start a blog today and pretend to be an expert on anything I want just by regurgitating other unverified, regurgitated crap I find on google. Maybe I already have.
Would you believe me? Because it's on the internet and not linked to a corporate whore MSM outlet, does that mean it's true?
People can say or be anything online with little or no accountability. That alone makes me suspicious.
also given that the internet is the best Orwellian environmentThe problem is MSM is more interested in hype and ratings. I would prefer blogs to their newscasts because at least the blogs are not dependent on readers.
No, but many of them are dependent on other things.
I could start a blog today and pretend to be an expert on anything I want just by regurgitating other unverified, regurgitated crap I find on google. Maybe I already have.
Would you believe me? Because it's on the internet and not linked to a corporate whore MSM outlet, does that mean it's true?
People can say or be anything online with little or no accountability. That alone makes me suspicious.
you make a mistake, delete it and act like it never happened
also given that the internet is the best Orwellian environmentNo, but many of them are dependent on other things.
I could start a blog today and pretend to be an expert on anything I want just by regurgitating other unverified, regurgitated crap I find on google. Maybe I already have.
Would you believe me? Because it's on the internet and not linked to a corporate whore MSM outlet, does that mean it's true?
People can say or be anything online with little or no accountability. That alone makes me suspicious.
you make a mistake, delete it and act like it never happened
I've seen little of that from those I read, quite the contrary, they use 'strikeout' to avoid removing things that were first posted incorrectly.
Too bad the MSM doesn't do the same or even the administrations with 'text' editions of speeches. Thankfully there's you tube all over nowadays.
well, that's Fox Entertainmentalso given that the internet is the best Orwellian environment
you make a mistake, delete it and act like it never happened
I've seen little of that from those I read, quite the contrary, they use 'strikeout' to avoid removing things that were first posted incorrectly.
Too bad the MSM doesn't do the same or even the administrations with 'text' editions of speeches. Thankfully there's you tube all over nowadays.
Our local reporters always direct the attention to their blogs on Fox now, they give headlines and say "for more information check out our blogs on q13fox.com" ... strange huh?
well, that's Fox EntertainmentI've seen little of that from those I read, quite the contrary, they use 'strikeout' to avoid removing things that were first posted incorrectly.
Too bad the MSM doesn't do the same or even the administrations with 'text' editions of speeches. Thankfully there's you tube all over nowadays.
Our local reporters always direct the attention to their blogs on Fox now, they give headlines and say "for more information check out our blogs on q13fox.com" ... strange huh?
