Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker (a self-described conservative) has written an op-ed appearing on-line, in which she describes the Journolist revelations as a tempest in a tea-cup, which it surely will be as the mainstream media buries it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/23/AR2010072304131.html
In Parker's point of view, the musings of liberal reporters and university professors was just that-sort of thinking out loud. Nothing ever really happened, you know. And what about their privacy? Was it right for Tucker Carlson to post all that listserve conversation on Daily Caller? Indeed, the title of her op-ed mentions the "destructive 'gotcha' mentality".
Well, as to the privacy issue, one should know by now that e-mails-especially on listserves, are not exactly considered as privileged communication.
What we have here is not a Watergate, where crimes were committed and special prosecutors and grand juries are summoned. What it is simply a public demonstration of how liberal reporters and professors have damaged their respective professions with their personal bias. When journalists are discovered discussing how they ca downplay the Jeremiah Wright story because it will hurt Obama's election chances, what does that tell the public about the professional integrity of the journalists? When a UCLA law professor is wishing that the FCC could revoke the license of Fox News, what does that tell the public about the professional integrity of our universities? God, what does that tell us about the legal mind of that UCLA law professor-who apparently has no clue about the First Amendment? This guy (Jonathan Zasloff) will probably rise to Obama's short list for that next Supreme Court vacancy.
Of course, one might argue that the head of the listserve, Ezra Klein, is only 26 years old and perhaps needs some seasoning. Ditto for Chris Hayes, one of the Journolist members, who looks even younger. In response, one could point to old Joe (Anonymous) Klein, who has all the seasoning in the world making outrageous statements. According to some reports, Klein appeared to be gathering in all the comments then regurgitating some thoughts as his own. But what can you expect from the Anonymous author of "Primary Colors"? Joe doesn't need any seasoning. He kn ows all the tricks.
Another question Ms Parker might ask herself is what does this say about the media ignoring the story altogether-except of course for that nasty old boogey man, Fox News? This is an issue that goes right to the integrity of the media itself. One would think they would be all over each other discussing and examining themselves.
Wouldn't one?
I'll withdraw the question, Your Honor.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Okay, did these people actually DO anything to suppress the story? Otherwise, you're convicting them of thoughtcrime.
Haven't you ever had a conversation where you talked about doing things that you wouldn't (and subsequently didn't) actually do?
Lance,
Let's start over. There is no criminal offense. Nobody is going to jail. But don't you think it is newsworthy that journalists are discussing how to suppress the Wright story? Don't you think it is newsworthy that a UCLA law professor is hoping that the FCC would shut down a news organ (Fox)?
How about if I as a DEA agent was talking about murdering drug dealers, or planting evidence?
The fact is that most of the media is ignoring this story. Yet, Fox always gets condemned because they report stories like this.
Good thoughful post and excellent rebuttal.
But don't you think it is newsworthy that journalists are discussing how to suppress the Wright story? Don't you think it is newsworthy that a UCLA law professor is hoping that the FCC would shut down a news organ (Fox)?
No.
How about if I as a DEA agent was talking about murdering drug dealers, or planting evidence?
No.
See? At least I'm consistent. Now, if in either of these two scenarios, people started to act upon those actions, then that would be something else.
This is a non-story, but it makes liberals look bad, so Fox runs with it.
I think it is "something else.". The main stream media did indeed ignore or play down the Rev Wright relationship. They consistently minimized the influence Wright had over Obama. They never addressed his relationship with Farrakahn, Billy Ayres, Resko,or Khalidi (sp?) in any meaningful way.
We are paying the price now for having a whole segment of the electorate not informed or uninformed about this crucial part of Obama's background.
This not just liberal bashing it is serious business showing that the liberal press carrying out an agenda instead of communicating the news. And they were
caught red handed.
Gary, you've taken ad hominem muttering to the point that I could not discern WHAT your point was from anything you said. Totally murky.
I did, however, read Parker's article. It is the kind of thoughtful analysis that have made Parker one of my favorite conservatives for many years. I don't always agree with her, but when I don't, I have to look at why I view the same well established facts differently than she does.
I actually do not think it newsworthy that one UCLA law professor is hoping that the FCC would shut down a news organ. I would consider it newsworthy if the FCC ever seriously considered such a thing, or, even if someone actually got a petition before the FCC requesting it.
If you as a DEA agent casually speculated at a dinner party about murdering drug dealers or how easy it is to plant evidence, I might consider it in bad taste, but not news. However, if you boasted that you had done such things, or were conspiring with fellow officers to do them, that would certainly be actionable.
It was an excellent column by Parker. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.
Oh, Midge, when and how did ANY media "play down" the Wright story? It was all over the place as far as I could tell. Liberal pundits were ranting about how Obama was "tanking in the polls," and interviewing Wright. What alternate reality were you living in?
Maybe Miggie was reading the emails on Journolist with the same alarm I did. By the way. Chris hayes, one of the "plotters" hosted Rachel maddow's show on MSNBC last night.
BTW, DEA would have fired me if I were found to be advocating those kinds of actions and probably prfosecuted me for conspiracy had anyone else been involved and an overt act occurred.
Overt act... our law would be so much more just if we simply insisted on an overt act before convicting people of conspiracy. As you know, although some of your readers may not, that does not require an overt act of murder, or possession, or sale, but an overt act to actually procure or prepare to commit a murder, or to obtain possession, or to set up a sale.
People are languishing in prison for long terms because someone claimed to have heard them speculating at a party about the possibilities... and this little brouhaha, about acts that are not actually crimes, appears to be on about the same level.
Post a Comment