Journalism Is Dead. Blog On!
Posted by cann0nba11 on May 28, 2009
Once upon a time reporters actually lived up to their title. They “reported” news. Their goal was to get the elusive “scoop” before those bastards from the competing newspaper got it first. They developed a network of dependable contacts and insiders to help find leads and verify data. The goal was to dig, dig, dig… get to the bottom of the story.
But then something happened. Television became a huge business. Advertising revenue became massive. A television evolved media entities became more powerful and ratings wars became fierce. The reality we have now is that mainstream media outlets are concerned more about ratings than they are about the truth. And this, combined with the massively disproportionate amount of liberal employees and executives, makes our current media environment toxic. Dangerous. A Tyrannosaurus Rex out for nothing but its next meal, to hell with any collateral damage.
The ferocious and hate-driven smear fest aimed at Sarah Palin last year is a fine example of this. But it is just an example of swarm-like activity focused on assumptions based on political hatred, not on relevance or substance. On the opposite side of the spectrum we have investigative apathy. You see, when you are in love with a political leader, there is no negative story about said leader worth pursuing. Instead you will attack those that question your chosen Messiah.
Case in point: The Obama Administration has taken control of American auto giants. In an effort to “save” the company it is directing the closure of hundreds of dealerships. The criteria behind these closings have yet to be made public, but initial data suggests that profitability has little to do with whether or not a dealership survives. What does matter? It looks like political affiliation and race are important factors.
“No.” you say. “It can’t be so.” An old fashioned journalist would look at the evidence and decide if this story was worth researching. If true, it could be a huge story. if false, the discrediting of the accusers could be a huge story. A win-win for the reporter, right? Not today. You see, the Obama-loving, kool-ade drinking media dares not question its savior. Instead it mocks any accusers. (see any Man-Made Global Warming or Intelligent Design stories for recent examples). The Washington Post offered this response yesterday:
“…have you or anyone at the Post investigated this? Chrysler dealers shut down in Obama bankruptcy are mostly Republican? It seems a crosscheck of dealerships to be closed versus donations shows almost all the dealers to be closed donated to Republicans.
Post business columnist Steven Pearlstein: “Oh, please. What percent of all auto dealers are Republican? I bet its (sic) pretty high.”
Sounds like a hard-hitting reporter to me, huh? Scoff at the accusation, forget about taking a moment to research it. Could it be true that most dealership owners are Republican by their entrepreneurial nature, therefore skewing the statistics? Or, could it be true that minority ownerships are being given preference to meet our liberal president’s personal agenda? Either way, this story merits more attention, not just disdain.
I suggest to the mental midgets in the media the following scenario: If, as you blindly feel, Obama is innocent of bias or wrongdoing, why not expend the minimal energy required to prove the neo-con haters wrong and then have Matthews, Olbermann and Stewart publicly lambaste them ad nauseum for the next month? Wouldn’t that be fun? C’mon hippy, you know you love a good neo-con train wreck. Fire up Google and have at it!
I think commenter Tre sums it up nicely: The MSM is too busy following those important, hard-hitting, vital stories like, what other pictures did Miss California pose for? What else “enchants” Duh One about the Presidency? Just how high is Duh One’s approval rating among illegal aliens? How will Colin Powell beat Rush Limbaugh in this war of words?