The Collusion of Media

A few days ago i came across this story:

www.politico.com...

from 2009 describing Journolist, a place for journalists to get together and communicate. Seems like a good idea on the surface, right? Well.....remember, our media is bought and paid for. Communication is less true. It is more like "collusion" or "conspiracy".

A snippet:

For the past two years, several hundred left-leaning bloggers, political reporters, magazine writers, policy wonks and academics have talked stories and compared notes in an off-the-record online meeting space called JournoList.

Proof of a vast liberal media conspiracy?

Not at all, says Ezra Klein, the 24-year-old American Prospect blogging wunderkind who formed JournoList in February 2007. “Basically,” he says, “it’s just a list where journalists and policy wonks can discuss issues freely.”

But some of the journalists who participate in the online discussion say — off the record, of course — that it has been a great help in their work. On the record, The New Yorker’s Jeffrey Toobin acknowledged that a Talk of the Town piece — he won’t say which one — got its start in part via a conversation on JournoList. And JLister Eric Alterman, The Nation writer and CUNY professor, said he’s seen discussions that start on the list seep into the world beyond.

“I’m very lazy about writing when I’m not getting paid,” Alterman said. “So if I take the trouble to write something in any detail on the list, I tend to cannibalize it. It doesn’t surprise me when I see things on the list on people’s blogs.”

Last April, criticism of ABC’s handling of a Democratic presidential debate took shape on JList before morphing into an open letter to the network, signed by more than 40 journalists and academics — many of whom are JList members.

Needless to say, these are people who can exert considerable influence. In the next paragraph it mentions Paul Krugman, the Nobel Prize winner.

OK, so a questionable endeavor nonetheless (even if it cannot be proven to be unethical). Oh...but wait:

dailycaller.com...

In the above article it basically goes over some of the emails that Weigel, writer for the Washington Post, had leaked. In the leaked emails he calls just about everyone he doesn't like (which seems to be conservatives) "ratf*ers". He talks about how the liberal journalists should try to downplay the Scott Brown win. He just engages in collusive behaviors with other journalists to promote a predetermined message about politics (namely, supporting the DNC).

After these emails leaked, he was forced to resign from The Washington Post.

This sickens me badly. There is no integrity in these actions (the last link is from this past Friday).

Well....lo and behold, look who picked up the little "ratf*er" with no journalistic integrity:

www.mediaite.com...

It seems that Keith "Fountain of Hate" Olbermann picked up this crusader for truth.

That sickens me even worse.

I posted all of this to tell you this: if you rely on any media for any news....don't. Take what they say, and ignore it. Sure, there may be some truth in there somewhere...but finding it is going to drive you nuts.

S-Dog has a post on his blog related to this material:

Gatekeeping

To get a clear understanding of what i am referring to here, and why this bothers me, take a few moments to read Shroedingers Dog's post above.

When this next election cycle comes around, remember: the candidates that the media gives the most airtime to are the ones you don't want to vote for. They are the ones who have bought and paid for that time, either with money or their souls, and will represent the status quo. You cannot trust the two parties, or our media any more.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


It's truly amazing what the left-wing media consider valid journalism. For instance, this quote by Alterman:

““I’m very lazy about writing when I’m not getting paid, so if I take the trouble to write something in any detail on the list, I tend to cannibalize it

In academia, we called that plagiarism. In journalism, he merely calls it laziness. I guess that is how the NY Times Jason Blair justified all of his made-up articles.

I'm sure that like me, you take most of what is in the media very lightly, if at all. The truth isn't important to them, only their agenda, and whatever they write, must support their agenda. Of course, that is why tyrants like Obama get elected. Too many people took the MSM treatment of him at face value. Now you and I have to suffer the consequences.

Starred and flagged.

reply to post by ProfEmeritus



As mentioned in another thread, Obama not only knew about Blago's seat, but he also did the same thing personally with another job in his admin.

And the media blew it over to a degree that the sleeping People never batted an eye.

The control that media has over the public is staggering. The difference between the US and the USSR? In the USSR the state paid for the media. In the US, the people pay for it. They have found a way to sell us their BS garbage, and to sell us nicer and nicer ways to partake of their garbage (via plasma TV's and DVR). We give them our money so that we can eat their vomit.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


I just heard about that today, I sure hope we get to hear more.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
Great thread!

I remeber the Politico JList story, and wrote it off as (semi) common knowledge and one of the liberal reporting "tools of the trade." Media Matters lite, sort of.

What I read yesterday was how the Post's Dave Weigel wasn't just talking trash on JList; he was doing it while POSING as the Washington Post commenter on conservative America, the Republican Party, and the Tea Party Movement!

His exhortations to his JList buds to push hard for liberal/democrat issues (Obamacare at the front) after Scott Brown's victory clearly crossed the lines into partisan politics; an extreme ethics violation for supposedly neutral "reporters."

A WSJ story on this prompted me to post another thread giving the details:
Mainstream Media Liberal Bias Admitted, Revealed by ... Mainstream Liberal Media

Breitbart is offering $100,000 to the leaker who exposed it to provide JList archives for more damning evidence.

"Climategate" for the MSM?

jw

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


Sorry...but in your ranting about the "rat*kr" story (yes, I read the Washington Post...it's the main paper, here) you had to go far out on a limb with this?:

It seems that Keith "Fountain of Hate" Olbermann picked up this crusader for truth.

That sickens me even worse.

Olbermann is ONE whose commentary and focus tends to call out the very sorts that you're tilting on about, in your OP.

Or...is your bias showing? Because Olbermann points out the vile, and to use your word (because it sickens me) sickness that exists in the ravings that spew from the likes of O'Reilly, Hannity, Malkin, Beck, et al...and etc.

The way you phrased it, makes it look as if you think that Keith Olbermann personally hired Wiegel over to MSNBC!

If you have a beef, direct it where it belongs...to the management of the NETWORK and cable operations....in this case MSNBC, if you're so worked up about it. Olbermann introduced (did you READ his tweet??) the 'new guy' because it's part of his on-air job...his personal opinion on the guy, either way, good OR bad, might come out eventually -- IF he can do so, and not violate terms of his contract.

I would think, within the profession, even if you hate and have no respect for the opinions or actions of a colleague employed by your same company, there are are limitations to what you can say publically about him/her...I would think this is basic in many of their employment contracts.

reply to post by jdub297


This is some good stuff. Please bring back anything you find.

There is lots of stuff out there...but do you expect the media to report on themselves?

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

Sorry...but in your ranting about the "rat*kr" story (yes, I read the Washington Post...it's the main paper, here) you had to go far out on a limb with this?:

It seems that Keith "Fountain of Hate" Olbermann picked up this crusader for truth.

That sickens me even worse.

Olbermann is ONE whose commentary and focus tends to call out the very sorts that you're tilting on about, in your OP.

Or...is your bias showing? Because Olbermann points out the vile, and to use your word (because it sickens me) sickness that exists in the ravings that spew from the likes of O'Reilly, Hannity, Malkin, Beck, et al...and etc.

The way you phrased it, makes it look as if you think that Keith Olbermann personally hired Wiegel over to MSNBC!

If you have a beef, direct it where it belongs...to the management of the NETWORK and cable operations....in this case MSNBC, if you're so worked up about it. Olbermann introduced (did you READ his tweet??) the 'new guy' because it's part of his on-air job...his personal opinion on the guy, either way, good OR bad, might come out eventually -- IF he can do so, and not violate terms of his contract.

I would think, within the profession, even if you hate and have no respect for the opinions or actions of a colleague employed by your same company, there are are limitations to what you can say publically about him/her...I would think this is basic in many of their employment contracts.

Keith Olbermann is part of what is wrong with America. What he says may or may not be true...i can't tell. It stinks too much to listen to his hateful rhetoric.

Just because i don't address others doesn't mean anything about my opinion of them. Don't try to make this partisan. If Weigel goes to work for, say, Sean Hannity, we can discuss it. Until then, this is about how media colludes with each other to slant the "news" and steer public opinion.

In this regard, there is no difference between them, and the "Ministry of Propaganda".

But to think that Olbermann, their highest rated "newsie" (on a station with ratings lower than you would see in most niche demographics), has no say in the manner...especially considering how well their views mesh, not to mention their language.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

If you want more sources, and sources within sources, go here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I've got at least 10 of them, not counting this/your thread.

jw

reply to post by weedwhacker

As for the Weigel - Olbermann connections at MSNBC:

Google "Weigel Olbermann" and you'll see that they've had a personal relationship for quite some time.

Which means that Olbermann:

1. knew Weigel was a far-left advocate before he tried to pretend to be a "reporter;" and,

2. misleadingly presented Weigel to MSNBC viewers as a "reporter" covering all things Republican for the Washington Post.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Olbermann in the JList archives when they turn up.

jw