Posts Tagged ‘MainStream media’

One of the first principles of when you have something to hide is that sunlight tends to cause annoyance.

Nick Green is seriously annoyed:

Some believe you have a particular bias or agenda if you refuse to cover a story. Some people believe the fact that you decide to cover a story means you have some sort of bias.

In short, you can’t win either way.

So imagine my surprise today to find I’m the victim of an Andrew Beitbart wannabe, a blogger with a clear agenda of his own who has decided in his hypocrisy I have one of my own.

I had intended to leave comment there but as the page keeps erroring out I will post here something here instead.

Nick, you are a reporter who is paid to do this for a living, so perhaps you might be unaware of a few things, so allow me a mere blogger to educate you on a few things:

Robert Stacy McCain is a reporter who also blogs, he has been a reporter for a very long time. If you were familiar with his work you would know this. I on the other hand am a blogger who writes a few articles on occasion. If you want to call anyone an “Andrew Breitbart wannabe” it would be me not him. Oh an although he is a big boy Robert Stacy is a personal friend of mine so I take it ill if you wish to disparage him for telling the truth.

Oh and BTW “Andrew Breitbart Wanabee” is not a pejorative outside of your circle. He is successful, runs several sites with many writers working under him and manages to do that in the teeth of a media that hates him. Yeah I’d be Andrew Breitbart like a shot.

“Blogger” is not a pejorative term either, no matter how much you want it to be. Bloggers have been breaking stories that the Mainstream Media (that would be you) have ignored for the last decade. One prominent Example, John Edwards Story by Mickey Kaus, he was on it for a year when the rest of the media couldn’t care less. Bloggers with video camera have been covering stories that the MainStream media have ignored or spun for years. Another story that you guys never bothered to cover. The interesting procedures for verifying credit card donations by the Obama camp during the 2008 election.

What? You never heard of it? Neither did your readers because the MSM (that would be you) choose not to cover the story. The lawyers/bloggers did instead.

Yes Robert Stacy McCain is a conservative, I am a conservative, in fact I am a registered (gasp) republican! There is a long tradition of “partisian” journalism that has existed since day one of newspapers. Perhaps you missed that day in school or attended public schools. Either way I don’t keep my biases secret. People can choose to talk to me or not on that basis, and can judge my coverage of events such as the MayDay march in Boston accordingly, vs reporters who hold off the record lunches with the White house they are supposed to cover.

Now as to the e-mails, as Robert Stacy said there are occasions when people e-mail in anger but you must get a whole lot more e-mail than me. If I get an e-mail I don’t want I delete it. It’s real simple. I don’t have your experience but people you burn tend to no longer talk to you. When your primary job is to get people to talk to you, even if they don’t want to that would be “bad”.

Finally I actually should be grateful to you, thanks to your e-mail and torrid schedule I was not only able to get an excellent and popular post. But was able to score an interview with the candidate that you had no time for from 3000 miles away, get a second post and a column in the examiner out of it. Now I don’t know you as a person, you might be a nice guy and a hard worker, but if you want to keep dropping the ball on the Mattie Fein campaign, I’ll do what I can by phone to pick it up from the bay state.

I was part of a spirited exchange on twitter last night with Dan Riehl and Josh Trevino I argued that we are obliged to act honorably saying:

Being right isn’t always in our control but acting honorable is.

So in that spirit lets take a long look at what happened here and who acted honorably and who did not. (more…)

After seeing the morning coverage and following all this stuff, it’s clear that the left which thought just last night it has control of the Shirley Sherrot story has not only lost it, but lost it totally.

The left wants a story about how evil Fox news is and how bad Andrew Breitbart is, the story however is that:

  • The White house is so weak that it fired one of their own supporters out of fear of Glenn Beck.
  • The NAACP backed the White House before reviewing the full tape which they had
  • The White House standing behind the firing, then at 2 a.m. backing off of it.

And even when the MSM gets Andrew Breitbart on TV figuring they can stick it to him what happens?

On CNN he stresses the double standard, and brings up Journolist

Well GMA is going to do better, after all they have Eric Boehlert on with him and George double teaming him so what will happen?

  • Breitbart makes it about the false NAACP tea party charges
  • Brings up 100k challenge, that I don’t remember ABC ever reporting on
  • Brings up 4 videos and Boehlert says he will take John Lewis over 4 videos
  • George asks Boehlert if it’s ok to show the videos and he says yes

Forget the White House not only does GMA fail to lay a glove on  Breitbart but he manage to advance his NAACP argument, the tea party double standard.  George’s last question is asking Boehlert if he should show Breitbart’s 4 Washington videos?  Tell me how long has ABC been asking Media Matters impramarter to report news?  Have they always done it or is this just the first time its been done on air?

How many people will they have to put up against Breitbart to have a shot?

And the news cycle will be about the White House until Sherrod is offered her job back, and now they have to worry:  “What if she doesn’t take it?”  Two days ago she was an obscure member of the government, now she is in the catbird seat and can get what she wants from the Administration, and the NAACP.  Will she make them pay for having her pull to the side of the road?  She controls the news cycle and every day the White House doesn’t pay her price is a day they lose on TV.

And this is the left’s victory?  It’s Bunker Hill without the red coats.  It’s the type of “victory” that breaks an army.

After Bunker Hill Gen Howe never tried another frontal assault again.  How gun-shy will the left and the media be about taking on Breitbart after this?

For the third time in a month a member of the MSM has lost a job for saying what they actually think:

CNN on Wednesday removed its senior editor for Middle Eastern affairs, Octavia Nasr, from her job after she published a Twitter message saying that she respected the Shiite cleric the Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, who died on Sunday.

Ms. Nasr left her CNN office in Atlanta on Wednesday. Parisa Khosravi, the senior vice president for CNN International Newsgathering, said in an internal memorandum that she “had a conversation” with Ms. Nasr on Wednesday morning and that “we have decided that she will be leaving the company.”

Ms. Nasr, a 20-year veteran of CNN, wrote on Twitter after the cleric died on Sunday, “Sad to hear of the passing of Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah … One of Hezbollah’s giants I respect a lot.”

Ayatollah Fadlallah routinely denounced Israel and the United States, and supported suicide bombings against Israeli civilians. Ayatollah Fadlallah’s writings and preachings inspired the Dawa Party of Iraq and a generation of militants, including the founders of Hezbollah, The New York Times reported on Sunday.

It’s the lead on memeorandum at the moment, and the ‘sphere is reacting…

Hotair:

Nasr had a role that helped shape CNN’s overall news coverage of the Middle East. As a senior editor that apparently reported to a senior VP, Nasr presumably had a hand in story selection, assignment, and editing and shaping the final product from her reporters.

Neither Thomas nor Weigel had anywhere near that kind of influence over news reporting at their respective outlets, which makes the credibility issue much more serious than in the previous two scandals.

That CNN is worried about credibility is amazing.

Ed Driscoll wonders why this is a problem at CNN:

She’s merely toeing the party line at CNN, which, from Saddam Hussein to Yasir Arafat to Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez, has never met a terrorist or dictator the network didn’t admire and wish to prop up.

I think it will be very interesting to see the reaction worldwide to this.
Tim Blair highlights some tweets on the subject:

Various instant reactions, one of them brilliant:

• Damn! 20 years in, but 140 characters and your fired!

• Shocking, Outrageous! Zionists succeed in getting @OctaviaNasrCNN fired for Fadlallah tweet

• 20 years and fired over a tweet??

• Is she joining NASA?

I’m going out on a limb to say that he likes the last one.
Don Surber gives Kudos:

Congratulations CNN for doing the right thing.

That one goes on the good side of his count.

Big Journalism gets to the heart of the matter:

As if further proof were needed that a sizable segment of the Fourth Estate is now effectively the Fifth Column, this one is right up there. Apparently it’s no longer enough that reporters and correspondents pretend to be neutral, even about the good guys — now, they’re not only not neutral, they publicly express their admiration for sheer, malevolent evil — a man who, according to the obits, was “known for his staunch anti-American stance.”

Good Lord, is this what American journalism has come to?

No this is where American journalism already was.

Pam Geller is brief:

Today the Nazi lover resigned. In a word, GOOD!

Well Pam wait till you see what the left says:

Crooks and liars plays the moral equivalence card

Evidently, if you’re CNN, it’s perfectly fine to hire commentators who refer to a US Supreme Court justice as a “goat f@$king child molester”, but God forbid an emotional, somewhat easily misinterpreted tweet should be granted similar mercy.

Apparently the difference between senior editor and a commentator is lost, but the most fun actually comes from two other sites:

Balloon Juice
:

I have no idea whether Nasr was any good, but it’s pretty harsh to fire someone over one tweet without a second chance.

Talking Points Memo:

But a twenty year run down the tubes over 140 characters?

That just doesn’t seem right to me.

Oh so 140 characters aren’t enough to get someone fired? Ok lets try this…

“Barack Obama is actually a secret Muslim who was born in Kenya and supports terrorists”

That’s 76 characters. Now myself, if the senior white house editor at CNN expressed such an opinion I’d give them the boot, but according to Balloon Juice and TPM’s arguments they should not be fired.

The real problem for CNN is how significantly the loss of Octavia Nasr effects the Hotness Gap but to paraphrase Jon Sable:

I never did like the terrorist sympathizers, not even the pretty ones.

I’m sorry positive position on Honor Killings not withstanding if you back suicide bombing you are a terrorist and no amount of side stuff will change it.