MSM Ignores General’s Denuciation of the Press
Reflecting the MSM bias, most news organization ignored the bulk of a general’s speech strongly denouncing media coverage of the war and focused only on the parts that criticizes the way the war is being currently ran. Captain’s quarters has more details.
Given that, it seems highly ironic that the journalists covering the story attempted to cover up the acidic, biting, and mostly accurate criticisms of their own performance in this war while giving front-page treatment to Sanchez’ criticisms of the political structure at the same time. If Sanchez has such credibility and standing to bring this kind of criticism to bear on Washington, why didn’t the Post and other news agencies give the same level of exposure to his media criticisms as well? He basically accuses them of cynically selling out the soldiers to defeat American efforts to win the war, and made sure that those accusations came first before his assessment of the political failures, but you’d never know that from the Post.
The Post then goes on to obfuscate a key part of the second half of Sanchez’ speech. While he criticizes the Bush administration in sharp terms, Sanchez blames the Democrats in equal measure. He calls out partisans on all sides for exploiting the war for their own political benefit rather than the good of the nation, and blames the lack of range for strategic options on the corrosive debate that has hamstrung the range of choices.
October 13th, 2007 at 7:32 pm
I agree. I really hate it when private companies do whatever it takes to sell their product to their consumers. We should definitely regulate what these sources tell our public. Stupid MSM trying to make money rather than telling the truth. We need a secretary of truth. I vote for Steve.
October 13th, 2007 at 11:41 pm
“AS I UNDERSTAND IT, YOUR MEASURE OF WORTH IS HOW MANY FRONT PAGE STORIES YOU HAVE WRITTEN AND UNFORTUNATELY SOME OF YOU WILL COMPROMISE YOUR INTEGRITY AND DISPLAY QUESTIONABLE ETHICS AS YOU SEEK TO KEEP AMERICA INFORMED.”
Wait, does this mean that reporters care about their careers? This is a shocking and appalling revelation!
“ONCE REPORTED, YOUR ASSESSMENTS BECOME CONVENTIONAL WISDOM AND NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO CHANGE.”
If this were true, pro-war reporting would still be the overwhelming majority. I’m old enough to remember the degree of jingoism present in the American MSM in the time immediately prior to the war, and until the liberal bias theory can account for that more satisfactorily than the sensationalist bias theory can, I am unlikely to take it very seriously.
“THE DEATH KNELL OF YOUR ETHICS HAS BEEN ENABLED BY YOUR PARENT ORGANIZATIONS WHO HAVE CHOSEN TO ALIGN THEMSELVES WITH POLITICAL AGENDAS.”
You’re spreading an anti-corporate agenda by providing us a link to this information, Steve. Clearly this is evidence of a systematic bias, and you must hate America and want us to lose capitalism.
October 14th, 2007 at 11:18 pm
Don’t need a secretary of truth. The left’s agenda driven monopoly on news dissemination is coming to an end thanks in larger part to the internet. News paper subscriptions are plummeting as people that prefer more neutral or right leaning news turned towards websites that actually meet their preferences. Whatever your problem, markets are the solution.
October 14th, 2007 at 11:21 pm
The only people that think the MSM was blatantly jingoistic with the run up to the war was the anti-war left. You are against the war, and you seem to lean left. Do the math. As for me I never thought the media was blatantly pro-war. In fact I’m baffled by statements made to this effect.
October 15th, 2007 at 9:11 am
Don’t give the right some strange credit for the demise of the newspaper industry. That was simply bound to happen with new technology making the product somewhat obsolete. I still find the same left slanted news from each of those major organizations whose websites must be in the top 10 of daily read in this country (CNN, NYT, WashPost, MSNBC, etc.).
October 15th, 2007 at 9:44 am
I’m not giving the right any credit. I’m simply pointing out that the MSM is making it desirable for a large segment of the population seek other sources of news. Fortunately new technologies have been very accommodating in providing new news sources.