Left and Right and Silly

~~By Kenosha Marge

I admit freely, openly and honestly that for many years I voted a straight Democrat ticket. I admit freely, openly and honestly that for many years I was a nitwit for doing that. I didn’t research and I didn’t even care all that much about investigating whether the person who got my silly vote so easily was worthy. If it breathed and had a “D” after it’s name, it got my vote. Come on admit it, most of you did the same thing.

Now all those years and silly votes later I am appalled at my lack of integrity. How can someone, anyone treat their precious right to vote so cavalierly? How could I? I hang my head in shame.

Like many of the left I pooh-poohed the sight of voters in Iraq proudly showing their “purple” fingers. They displayed their “purple” fingers proudly and courageously. Because I was so partisan and loathed George Bush I missed something very important. Among all the death and destruction a good thing happened. Just because I hated the war and those that supported it was no reason to dismiss the joy those people felt because they were finally allowed to vote. Did they all vote intelligently? Do we? They dodged gunfire and the real fear of death to vote. Many Americans stay home if it rains. I am ashamed that my partisanship made me dismiss that pride and courage.

I was a person who had always prided myself on being a good citizen because I always voted. Now I see myself as no better than those that didn’t vote. They might have been lazy, but I was stupid. Sadly there are a lot of voters, left and right that do the same thing I always did. Sadly they haven’t seen the light. If it lives and breathes and spouts the correct talking points and has the “right” as in correct consonant after their name, they’ll vote for he/she/it. Isn’t it amazing how easily satisfied we have become about the people that are supposed to represent us?

The newly smarter me now looks at actions instead of words and deeds instead of the doer. And guess what? There are many times when I would not vote for the Democrat. The first time I came to that conclusion I was totally goshwoggled. How could I have been so blind? Kinda like many people feel once the honeymoon is over.

Having decided in my old age to take off the partisan blindfold I discovered a world of things I had not acknowledged as worthy. If all worthiness is in my party then your party is unworthy. Had I ever trimmed all the rhetoric and high-flying phrases down to that simplicity I might have noticed what a nitwit I was far sooner. I must admit that the words “ better late than never” don’t sound so good to me right now. As we used to say back in my day, it sounds like a cop-out.

I also should have noticed far sooner that are media is no longer made up of the same kind of people we had when I first started watching the news with my parents. It is no longer a “Chet and David” media world.

I always suspected that most politicians, even a Democrat or two, lied occasionally. It didn’t occur to me that people in the business of informing the people did the same thing. People who had their own little section of the Constitution wouldn’t be so crass. Would they? Are they? Damn.

The majority of the print media as well as those that infest our airwaves and television screens are people with little or no integrity. They “spin” the news to make it say what their corporate bosses want it to say and then collect giant paychecks for being liars. Prostitutes give more bang for the buck than presstitutes. They have a higher customer satisfaction rate too I suspect.

One of the sleaziest of these overpaid slugs, by the name of Olbermann, has one of the lower ranked and rated programs on cable news. Olbermann is consistently beaten and beaten badly night after bloviating night in the ratings. This would seem to say that his bosses–that would be GE–are willing to pay this cretin enormous amounts of money to lie, spin, twist, and distort the news for public consumption and to hell with ratings. I am happy to report that the cretinous Tweety Matthews has even lower ratings..

I admit to having watched Olbermann for a while. His shtick grew old very quickly. He did bash Bush when few others were willing to do that. He also made a nightly habit of beating up on some dimwitted or demented female personality. What was with that, I wondered. Time came to prove that is was because the man is a rampant misogynist. Probably has a small or inactive weenie too. That he uses Murrow’s tagline is repulsive.

Now that I have finally opened my eyes and looked around I find that there is very little differences in the two major parties. They both pander shamelessly to their base, they both promise the moon and deliver a pizza, and they are both corrupt. Their issues may at times seem polar opposite but in the end they are alike in that all they truly care about is getting rich, getting power, and getting re-elected.

Common sense, which I once thought I had should have made me see the error of my ways long before I did. The Democratic Party had to show such corruption that I could no longer ignore it before I admitted the truth to myself. None of us likes admitting that we are/were wrong.

As a resident of the great state of Wisconsin I should have been more aware. We after all have foisted men like Joe McCarthy on the public. We have also gifted them with the likes of William Proxmire. Seems almost schizophrenic doesn’t it?

We carry through on that tradition to this day. Our two “Democratic” Senators, Feingold and Kohl both have a “D” after their name. One really does represent all those old-fashioned democratic ideals that I have believed in and thought I was voting for all these years. The other? Not so much. I am proud to have voted for Russ Feingold and equally proud to have voted against Herb Kohl. Both these actions are now done with both eyes wide open and without a partisan blindfold in sight. I even find myself agreeing with my Republican Congresscritter Paul Ryan now and again. Imagine that. A short time ago I couldn’t have.

***

Links of interest:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Proxmire

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_McCarthy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Fleece_Award

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=44963

SHILLING and CHURNING–the State of the Media and the “Mass Production of Ignorance” (A Double Post by kenosha Marge and InsightAnalytical-GRL)

The two pieces in this post are intertwined. First, there is “American Media Shills for Obama” by kenosha Marge.  Then, check out “Flat Earth News–The State of ‘Churnalism'” by InsightAnalytical-GRL, an introduction to the acclaimed journalist Nick Davies and his courageous expose’ about the “news” business.

American Media Shills for Obama

~~By kenosha Marge

Has the time finally come when ordinary citizens stop listening to the drivel coming from the mouths of multi-millionaire pundits? Have we really gotten mad as hell and aren’t going to take it any more?

Going back as far as William Randolph Hearst it is easy to see that media moguls were always about money and power, not journalism. It was in fact Hurst’s engaging in a bitter circulation war with Joseph Pulitzer‘s New York World which led to the creation of “yellow journalism“–sensationalized stories of dubious veracity.

There was a time between Hearst and the Current Millionaire Media Morons that infest our newspapers and airwaves today when some actual journalism occurred.

Having been raised with the Huntley-Brinkley Report and Walter Cronkite what passes for journalism these days is wretched. Certainly Edward R. Murrow, must be spinning in his grave knowing that a hack like Keith Olbermann, is using his signature line, “Good Night and Good Luck”.

It is interesting that Murrow gave a speech before the Radio and Television News Directors Association in Chicago in which he blasted TV’s emphasis on entertainment and commercialism at the expense of public service. That was on October 15, 1958. I suspect he would be appalled to see how far down that road the media has traveled.

Today’s media gives us such stalwarts as Charlie Gibson of ABC who sneered his way through an interrogation disguised as an interview. Gibson tried to embarrass and demean Governor Sarah Palin. Instead he embarrassed himself and the occupation he represents so poorly. We really aren’t interested in whether you like Governor Palin or not Charlie, we just expect you, as a professional to conduct an interview that allows us to make our own decisions based on what WE perceive to be the truth. Your opinion Charlie is irrelevant.

This election cycle, like many before has shown us a media increasingly less interested in reporting the news than in making it. We expected that the Clinton-hating media would attack her relentlessly without regard for truth, fairness or integrity. We didn’t expect their blatant misogyny and their slobbering preference for Obama. There wasn’t even a pretense of fair coverage.

Now John McCain is being treated in the same way. Must be a surprise for him since he is used to being the media darling. He is learning that media, like jackdaws, are attracted to the newest shiniest object to enter their sphere.

Oprah Winfrey had the honesty to admit being an Obama acolyte. She is just a talk show hostess so her opinion is just that, her opinion. She might better occupy her time recommending Diets or Authors but then she’s missed a few times on those issues too.

Chris Matthews is a silly, sexist, twit. Had Matthews forthrightly admitted to being in the tank for Obama you might at least have respected his honesty. His pretense of being neutral was absurd. The tingle up his leg is probably a sign of poor circulation and not enough blood getting to his brain.

The list of Obama fans in the press is nearly endless. Eugene Robinson, E.J. Dionne, and Chris Cillizza are press agents for the Washington Post. Like many papers its circulation is dropping and will likely continue to drop as readers find themselves faced with fewer journalists and a proliferation of cheerleaders.  Were it not for Dana Priest and Thomas E. Ricks the Post wouldn’t be worth reading.

Frank Rich, and Bob Herbert love them some Obama for the New York Times. The Times should no longer be allowed to proclaim itself a newspaper of record. Professional and unbiased? Were it not for Paul Krugman the current Times would only be useful for the bottom of my parrot cage.

Only on the right is Obama not fawned over like the second coming. Even there he isn’t pummeled with the fervor to which a democrat is typically subjected. If Corporate Left and Corporate Right likes someone, that someone might not be the best choice for all us little peons out here that don’t have media contracts worth millions.

Our media has decided that they want Obama to be president. In pursuit of their wish that such a thing come to pass they are willing to slime anyone, tell any lie, spin a few words into something unrecognizable as from the truth and show us their true, corporate colors. There may be a few, a very few, honest, decent, hardworking journalists around. But real Journalists don’t work on cable “news” programs and they seldom show up on the pages of the top newspapers in the country. Like common sense, integrity and honesty are becoming less common all the time.

MSNBC has become the Obama network. I believe the “M” stands for misogynistic. CNN has become the loving Obama all the time network. CNN was once a respected news channel. Now there is more blather than news and more opinion than fact. Jumped the shark a while back. FOX, to everyone’s surprise has been the most unbiased of the 3 cable “news” network. Whoever would have believed that would come to pass?

Few people respect or believe media. Seven out of 10 voters (69%) are convinced that reporters try to help the candidate they want to win, and this year by a nearly five-to-one margin voters believe they are trying to help Obama. What does that say about how voters view the integrity of the media?

As if the misbehavior of the media were not enough they sneer down their exfoliated noses at the rabble for being “low information” voters. They do not do their job to inform us, then insult and demean us for NOT being informed.

Who, what, when, why and where as journalistic ideology? Gone with the snows of yesteryear…

*****************************

“Flat Earth News” — The State of ‘Churnalism'”

~~by InsightAnalytical-GRL

While listening to the BBC World Service months ago, I heard an interview with author Nick Davies, an acclaimed investigative reporter from Britain (see bio below). Davies, who had written a book entitled “Flat Earth News” (published in February 2008) lambasted the present state of journalism. In the book, Davies “exposes falsehood, distortion and propaganda in the global media.” Check out his website of the same name.

The part of the interview that has stayed with me these many months was his discussion of what Davies calls “churnalism.” If you scan the reaction by the journalists who have commented on the book, you’ll see the frustration of many of them who have experienced the process of taking press releases that have been rehashed and passed off as real news gathering and those who have been forced to rely on “automated news-sifting services” because they are no longer given the time to investigate stories or check their facts. In other words, as one comments, most news “isn’t original anymore.”

A video of a more recent interview with Davies on “churnalism” is available here at the BBC site and is well-worth watching!

Here’s a synopsis of the book from Davies’ site:

“Finally I was forced to admit that I work in a corrupted profession.” When award-winning journalist Nick Davies decided to break Fleet Street’s unwritten rule by investigating his own colleagues, he found that the business of truth had been slowly subverted by the mass production of ignorance.

Working with a network of off-the-record sources, Davies uncovered the story of the prestigious Sunday newspaper which allowed the CIA and MI6 to plant fiction in its columns; the daily newsroom where senior reporters casually refer to ‘nig nogs’ and where executives routinely reject stories about black people; the respected quality paper which was so desperate for scoops that it hired a conman to set up a front company to entrap senior political figures. He found papers supporting law and order while paying cash bribes to bent detectives and hiring private investigators to steal information.

Davies names names and exposes the national news stories which turn out to be pseudo events manufactured by the PR industry and the global news stories which prove to be fiction generated by a new machinery of international propaganda.

He shows the impact of this on a world where media consumers believe a mass of stories which, in truth, are as false as the idea that the Earth is flat – from the millennium bug to the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, tainting government policy, perverting popular belief.

He presents a new model for understanding news. With the help of researchers from Cardiff University, who ran a ground-breaking analysis of the contents and sources for our daily news, Davies found most reporters most of the time are not allowed to dig up stories or check their facts – a profession corrupted at the core.

Read All About It. The news will never look the same again.

An extract from the book is here.

Needless to say, this book has raised the hackles of many in the established media.  A paperback edition will be published in early 2009.

Check out Nick Davies’ site for updated posts on recent media distortions and for many links about the book and reactions to it, as well as media-monitoring sites, including:

http://www.flatearthnews.net/links

http://blogs.pressgazette.co.uk/wire/2040

****

Nick Davies’ Resume

“Nick Davies has been named Journalist of the Year, Reporter of the Year and Feature Writer of the Year for his investigations into crime, drugs, poverty and other social issues. Hundreds of journalists have attended his masterclass on the techniques of investigative reporting. He has been a journalist since 1976 and is currently a freelance, working regularly as special correspondent for The Guardian. He also makes TV documentaries; he was formerly an on-screen reporter for World In Action. His four books include White Lies (about a racist miscarriage of justice in Texas) and Dark Heart (about poverty in Britain). He was the first winner of the Martha Gellhorn award for investigative reporting for his work on failing schools and recently won the award for European Journalism for his work on drugs policy.”

Tarnished Star #2? Keith Olbermann Does a Nastier Version of the Bill Richardson “Turn on the Clintons”

Here’s must read article in the New Yorker magazine entitled “One Angry Man” that really describes in gory detail the Keith Olbermann personality disturbance which manifested during the primaries. The article starts with how Olbermann has become the latest to help transform “news” into “opinion” on cable, even before the primary season, but the really interesting part of the piece comes later in the piece and centers on Olbermann’s nasty turn on the Clintons. It’s one thing to change one’s allegiance, but another to do so with such overt hostility. Richardson, at least, didn’t get nearly as nasty as he threw the Clintons under the bus. And Richardson doesn’t have a nightly television show which he can use to deliver a regular pounding.

I remember, as does the author, the time when Olbermann was a fan of Bill Clinton, in the era B.B.O. (Before Barack Obama). Clinton, for all his troubles, was what Republicans could be compared to, much to the detriment of the current Administration.

Olbermann says that he began the campaign season determined to remain neutral on the Democratic race, although he was plainly friendly with the Clintons. (During an interview with Bill Clinton in 2006, Olbermann handed the former President a personal donation to the Clinton Foundation.) Olbermann liked Obama, but he believed, at first, that he would not make a strong candidate.

Then, of course, the wheels came off. Olbermann, once the daring, outspoken “truthseeker,” bought into the meme that Clinton and surrogates were “attacking” Obama. I recently rewatched what I think was a pivotal moment in the shift of the season’s narrative. It’s the video of Michelle Obama just before the South Carolina primary in which she is asked why Obama has, if I recall correctly, “only 38% of the black vote” and she stated that figure would change because “black people will wake up.” We all know now that the campaign to turn Bill Clinton into a racist bloomed then.