Most Trusted Newsman

This guy.

It really tells you a lot about the media when a comedian is more trusted than the guys who actually get paid to do it for a living.

Really?

CNN on Michael Jackson's farewell ceremony after his daughter Paris spoke a few words:

"...it literally tore your heart out" and "I don't think there was a dry eye on the planet".

Coming from a big Jackson fan as a kid, let me just say this: Perspective and I'll take the under.

Finding The Story

So Obama held a presser today. Michael Scherer did a write up on the whole thing. You might expect it to cover some of the give and take on health care. You might expect it cover Obama's response to the criticism levelled his way from GOP lawmakers. You might think that two of the most important issues of the day might garner a bit more than a passing mention. You would think wrong. The write up is all about the media and how it sparred with Obama. At some point, it would nice if some of the members of the traditional media were reminded that they aren't the story.

I don't think that I have ever read a sports article that focused solely on the tension between athlete and journalist or the give and take between reporter and subject. There are some pretty shitty sports writers out there, but all of them know that they aren't the story. The American public is, in general, pretty stupid when it comes to policy. A better media would do a lot to fix this. Guys like Michael Scherer aren't helping.

Maybe it's Ray Allen? More sensationalism

A few days ago, Celtics G Ray Allen was supposedly hotter than anyone, according to a goober on ESPN's Sportscenter. Tonight TNT color commentator Reggie Miller said this after a shot by Ray Allen in what was nearly a great comeback by the Celtics (down 28, cut it to four with 40 seconds remaining);

"You could not have shot that any better than Ray Allen just did."

The shot rimmed out.

This SCOTUS Crap Is Gonna Make My Head Explode

Example A
Jeffrey Rosen has an article for The New Republic that is being advertised as...

the first in a series of reports by TNR legal affairs editor Jeffrey Rosen about the strengths and weaknesses of the leading candidates on Barack Obama's Supreme Court shortlist.

To spare you the time reading the article the takeaway is that Sonia Sotomayor is stupid. To prove it, Rosen uses nothing but a bunch of unnamed sources. Hooray for journalism!

Rosen is sure to assure us that this isn't a case of people disliking Sotomayor.

...they're not motivated by sour grapes or by ideological disagreement--they'd like the most intellectually powerful and politically effective liberal justice possible.

I guess we just have to take Rosen's word for it since he doesn't really name who all the quotes are from. He also doesn't give any actual examples other than more unnamed sources saying Sotomayor is a stupid head. Of course, I feel pretty confident that anybody who grows up in the South Bronx and ends up going to Princeton probably does have an IQ problem.

The real kicker for me is this part.

I haven't read enough of Sotomayor's opinions to have a confident sense of them, nor have I talked to enough of Sotomayor's detractors and supporters, to get a fully balanced picture of her strengths.

One would think that when writing an article that is supposed to be 'about the strengths and weaknesses' of the leading candidates for the Supreme Court that Rosen could at least be bothered to do some work other than leaning on unnamed sources.

I would just like to add that an unnamed source told me that Rosen is a fucking hack journalist who makes Sotomayor look brilliant and he likes to kick puppies.

The Sky Is Falling - Oh wait, it's just the flu

Paging Y2K fanatics. Please put down your jugs of water and read this courtesy of Time Magazine.

One of the more telling sentences that likely many people glossed over: A pandemic doesn't mean that a new virus is unusually deadly, only that it spreads easily.

Hope you saved that bomb shelter receipt.

A little perspective, please

Some Sportscenter guy last night: "There was no one hotter than Ray Allen in the first two periods."

How about this woman?

Joakim Noah on the Bulls 3OT win last night: "We were really close to death..."

How about this boy?

I Don't Get It

Karen Tumulty thinks that Lisa Gutierrez has a good point.

Here is Gutierrez's point.

President Barack Obama kissed former Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius Tuesday night after she was sworn in as Health and Human Services Secretary in the Oval Office.

She was immediately dispatched to a top-level briefing about the swine flu outbreak.

Maybe they should have just stuck with the handshake?

Seriously, I don't get it. Is it a some kind of Lewinsky reference? I can't believe these people get paid.

Liberal Bias

CNN hires Mary Matalin, former advisor to both Bush and Cheney.

She joins a number of her former co-workers making the transition to major media.
Michael Gerson (Washington Post), Sara Taylor (MSNBC), Tony Snow (CNN), Frances Fragos Townsend (CNN), Nicole Wallace (CBS News), Dan Bartlett (CBS News), Jeff Ballabon (CBS News), Tony Fratto (CNBC) and, of course, Karl Rove (Fox News, Newsweek, and Wall Street Journal) have all gone from working for Bush/Cheney to working for the mainstream media.

Just don't forget that the media is scary liberal and liberals hate freedom.

Stop The Stupid

One reason that newspapers are dropping like flies these days is that they publish stupid shit like this. Andrew Klavan wants people to know Limbaugh is awesome. Let the stupid begin....

Which leads to a question: Why not? I mean, come on, the guy's one of the figures of the age. Aren't you even curious? I listen to all your guys: NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, The Times, the New York Times, the New Yorker -- I check out the whole left-wing hallelujah chorus. Why are you afraid to spend a couple of hours listening to Limbaugh's show and seriously considering if and why you disagree with him?

Gimmick journalism sucks.

Joe Cole does some digging in the comments section of the article to find more stupid.

There seems to me no question that the Batman film “The Dark Knight,” currently breaking every box office record in history, is at some level a paean of praise to the fortitude and moral courage that has been shown by George W. Bush in this time of terror and war. Like W, Batman is vilified and despised for confronting terrorists in the only terms they understand. Like W, Batman sometimes has to push the boundaries of civil rights to deal with an emergency, certain that he will re-establish those boundaries when the emergency is past.

I thought Bush was like Jack Bauer?

The Importance of Tone

Katia Bachko has a pretty interesting article on the presses reaction to the other nights press conference. I think her wrap-up is pretty solid and holds a good deal of truth.

In the end, the focus on tone demonstrates all over again how the press transforms politics into a blood sport with quantifiable winners and losers, which is disconnected from the significance of actual policy—roads built, hospitals staffed, schools renovated. The impulse to cover the horse race at the cost of the seriousness of governance persists. In this case, if Obama’s the professor, then the press is a bunch of unruly kids who won’t calm down after recess. The election is long behind us, get back to work.

While I think it is very true that the press attempts to turn everything in politics into a blood sport or a horse race, I think there is also something more to it. I think a number of people in the press avoid digging in on policy simply because they don't understand it. That isn't really a knock on them, some of this stuff is pretty complicated. Obama surrounds himself with a number of advisers who help him work through policy, people who tend to be experts in the field they are working in. These are people who often have dedicated much of their lives to education, health care, the financial markets, etc. The press surround themselves with people who have spent much of their lives dedicated to grabbing headlines and shaping stories. While they have their own version of experts to help breakdown stories, their contribution is a pretty small part of the story if they go to them at all. The big news heading into the presser the other day was that Geithner had just released his big plan to help nudge the financial market back on track. There wasn't a single question asked about it. I think a big reason why is because folks like Jake Tapper and Chuck Todd are not experts in the field of finance so they don't know what to ask or even how to ask it.

To put it in a more simple way, I do a lot of writing on fantasy football. During the season and sometimes even out of season, I spend hours each day researching stats, tendancies, injuries and trends. While the season is rolling, I can tell you the top defenses in the league defending against quarterbacks and who are the worst. I can tell you which No. 3 wide receiver is most likely to turn in a solid week, which is gold in fantasy football. I have a fair number of articles out there with my name attached to them and I feel as if I have a somewhat solid grasp of the industry. What I can't do is tell you how a credit default swap works. I struggle in explaining cost outlays of medicare. So when, and if, I ever write about them I have to dance around the edges. As a result, and for good reason, there are no articles out there with my name on them dealing with the financial markets and medicare reform. So why, when the first presser after the announcement of Geithner's plan isn't the New York Times sending Paul Krugman to ask some questions?

Traditional Media Mad At Being Ignored

Just watched a segment on Hardball that was so stupid I could hear brain cells collapsing in my head. Matthews was complaining about Obama not calling on the Times or Post at the last presser and how he was attempting to go around the traditional media. Matthews was also trying to claim that in doing so Obama was attempting to avoid tough questions. Here is an example of one of those tough questions from the Post.

Your tough traditional media at work.

Stop The Stupid

The media's fixation on Obama using a teleprompter for prepared remarks drives me up the fucking wall. It is almost as if they don't read their own articles.

Every president since Dwight D. Eisenhower has used teleprompters, but none as extensively as Mr. Obama.

Ahhhh so everybody since Esenhower has used them, but Obama uses them more. Good to know.

Instead, when they used prepared remarks, other presidents tended to use printouts or note cards.

Damn you Obama and your use of technology!

On Last Thing

I am going to go kill some zombies, but I stumbled upon this first.

I really am tired of all the faux populism and outrage that we get spoon fed daily. I really think we have reached the point were it is more important for politicians to be equally outraged at stupid shit as it is for them to actually have some ideas about governing. I still remember a number of pundits claiming that the biggest reason why Bush won over Gore was because more people wanted to have a beer with Bush. That somehow Bush was more like us, whoever us is. Not one of these punidts pointed out how sad that was. In election for the most powerful position in the world the decision came down to who is most like you and not who has the best education, economic or foreign policy.

Anyway, I'm getting off point. To guide us back, I really like this line from Klein's post.

The problem with outrage is that it occludes vision.

His sum-up is pretty solid as well.

If you want to be angry about something, get pissed at a media culture that goes beserk about bonuses one week and forgets all about them the next. And be worried, quite worried, about a society for whom anger is a form of entertainment.

I would add one thing. Klein is a very big part of the 'media culture that goes beserk about bonuses one week and forgets all about them the next.' I think he avoids this type of journalism more than others, but his place at the table puts him in a unique position to do something about it. Hell he shares blog and ink space with people who practice what he is preaching against on a regular basis. Unless he is willing to go after them for going after the cheap outrage of the day stories, I wish he would just shut the hell up.

Reporting For Ratings

Something that I think often gets lost in the shuffle of media criticism is that the purpose of the media has evolved. Due in large part to the rise of the 24 hour news channel, the media has gone from the information business to the entertainment business. Getting the best reporting is secondary to getting the best ratings. Joe Scarborough is probably the best example of this. Take a look at some of his predictions from 2006.

On Obama

Barack Hussein Obama is more Johnny Bravo than John Kennedy. The vest fits and the fans scream while DC’s star-maker machinery shifts into overdrive. Like Peter Brady’s Bravo, Obama’s shot at the top will be short lived. But since BHO is young enough, dynamic enough and (just) black enough to whip official Washington into a frenzy, expect this stupid story to stick around for a while.

On Hillary Clinton

Time and again throughout the next few years, Bill Clinton will make the difference on fundraising, networking and strategy. And 2007 will show that any politico who dares to cross Team Clinton risks being crushed into dust.

On Al Gore

Gore will feel growing pressure to save the party from Hillary Clinton. If his biggest contributors from 2000 line up, he will run. But let’s just hope he curbs his appetite by 2008, for the sake of his image and our arms.

Now, I will give Joe a bit of a pass considering that it was 2006 but even leading up to the early primaries Joe was saying pretty much the same stuff about the Obama/Clinton face-off. And he was dead wrong in 2006 and he was dead wrong in 2008....and he is rewarded with a three hour show on MSNBC. Joe isn't a lone in being consistently wrong, but rewarded for being so. How many talking heads called the primary over after Iowa and before New Hampshire? Think any of them are out of work? Remember all the trouble Obama was going to have winning Ohio and Pennsylvania because Clinton won them and he didn't? Remember how they were huge wins for Clinton, nevermind she only gained somewhere around 9 delegates over Obama and would need about 40 more wins from states the size of Ohio and Texas to catch up.

Solid, factual information has taken a backseat to ratings. Hell, in many cases it isn't even in the car, but hitchiking somewhere along the information highway. This is the biggest problem within the media, the shows and pundits that are most watched aren't staffed by the best reporters, but by those who bring in the most viewers, listeners and readers.

Take a look at the current stimulus debate. We are facing a crisis of historical porportions that could get much much worse. We aren't discussing that on the teevees though. You don't see many economists talking about what the lack of credit in the economy means and why it is important for us not to rely on a bubble based economy (think housing and technology). Instead, the reporting is 95 percent about how to get bipartisan support for the stimulus package. It is almost as if the lack of bipartisanship in politics is what caused our economic troubles and only bipartisanship can save us. Republicans Vs. Democrats is second only to CNN's consistent 'Where the White Woman At' stories in the ratings games. Talking about the actually workings of the economy, is something most of us would avoid like the plague.

An uninformed public is a bad one and when the media is made up of ratings grabbers instead of news gatherers we are worse off. The sad thing is that there really isn't much you can do about it, at least not that I can see.

*so I don't get an email from friends, Clinton's pick-ups from Ohio and Texas are just rough guess. I seem to remember it was either 9 or 7. Both those numbers could be wrong and probably are.

Less Is Not More

As a former English major I feel supremely qualified to say for the record that less is not more. More is more and less is actually less. This might seem like a pretty simple concept to some, but apparently ESPN needs to be reminded that words have meaning as they cut content on their site to boost advertising revenue.

ESPN. com is moving in a less-is-more direction, at least on the home page.

If ESPN would just be honest and say that they want to generate more ad revenue at the expense of content instead of treating people like idiots would be great.

Show Your Work

Nothing made me break out into a cold sweat than seeing 'Show Your Work' on a math test. I'm beginning to think this would be a good requirement for some of the folks in the press. I have heard several 'the left wing blogs are upset at Obama' for about every decision and non-decision he has made so far. The trouble is, I haven't seen it and I read most of them. Their have been some complaints, but nothing to the level that some pundits are claiming (I talking to you David Shuster). It would be nice if they would point out some examples. Since they aren't, my guess is that they are doing what I used to do on those old math tests and just making shit up.

Only Losers Fact Check

ABC isn't alone in making the claim that union workers for the Big 3 make more than 73 dollars an hour in wages and benefits, but they appear to be the most recent. It isn't true.

I can't help but think how awesome it would be if we had a media where facts mattered.