The House of David

"dawnbreak in the west"

Thursday, May 26, 2016

Busted names in news

I just now got bored and sifted through a waste bin of essays I was going to post, but didn't get around to. I ran across one from Valentine's Day 2005. I think it's worth fixing up in light of recent events - specifically, the launch of wesearchr.

CNN a decade back used to boast the most trusted name in news. Hugh Hewitt - then still relevant, before the 2008 election - snarked that CNN had become the most busted. This was because of the Eason Jordan scandal, itself then sarcastically dubbed "Eason's Fables".

Basically this Eason chappie, whom no-one remembers today, had been accusing the US of deliberately targeting journalists in war zones such as Iraq. And then Eason claimed he didn't mean it that way, but he still wouldn't ask for the tape to be released so that his readers could figure that out for ourselves. After much anger on the 'web, but none in the MainStreamMedia, Eason finally backed down and... quit. He still didn't want us to see the tape. I assume he still doesn't, in 2016. Captain's Quarters has more. (Link still active!)

Check out this comment from Photon Courier in Captain Quarters' comments (also still active!): Before there was such a thing as the blogsophere...I wonder how much important information fell into the memory hole because of MSM decisions not to cover it?

Blogs did exist between 1/1/1999 and 9/11/2001, but they didn't have any clout. Before that, there were websites like Drudge, who blew the lid off Monica (so to speak). But that ended up hurting the anti-Clinton forces far more than it hurt Clinton. Talk radio was what got Congress flipped in 1994; but the MSM learnt to call it "hate radio" a la Rwanda and by 1996 they'd neutralised it. I remember "Doonesbury" and "Funky Winkerbean" from the period, bringing the Word On High down to the comics-reading public. What used to happen then is that journalists rallied in the statists' defence; they'd attack journalists who questioned the narrative - that is, they acted as Party Men, attacking the journalists who did their job.

So to answer the Courier commenter - I bet there were a lot of things the MSM could have said about Perot and Clinton in 1991-2 but didn't. I bet that if the talk radio types had had blogs in 1995 that the MSM wouldn't have been able to slap them down so easily. We didn't have MEMRI or Little Green Footballs (again, this was 2005 - but this time I ain't linking that swamp) to warn us about the rise of Islamism; all we had were reports from the Sullivan / Kurtz-era "The New Republic" - which were good, then, but not enough (and also tainted by the frauds Shalit and Glass). Back in the 1990s it was North Korea's nuclear brinkmanship and China's buying of tech secrets that might have been worth a media look. But no, to the Leftist palace guard, everything was going great; or it would have been, if it weren't for "right wing extremists" at home like Timothy McVeigh and Newt Gingrich.

CNN is busted, was busted in 2005. They're all busted. The main difference in 2005 is that we were learning to say it in public. Sometimes that helped - it got rid of Eason. It got rid of Dan Rather before. But the CNN brand kept plodding along, like the CBS brand is plodding along. Gawker, after all its lies during #gamergate, thought they could keep plodding along.

Now the crocodiles've pissed off too many people. They pissed off Peter Thiel. They pissed off Pax Dickinson. And now there's money in it for journalists who haven't been invited to the right parties, but know their craft. Thus - belatedly - Eason and his like have become targets; not by the bullets of US's troops, but by the slings of their own lying words.

We don't need CNN anymore.

PS: and Yahoo can get bent too.

posted by Zimri on 21:37 | link | 0 comments

On this site



Random crap

Powered By Blogger TM

Property of author; All Rights Reserved