A large part of the anti-military and anti-war bias of the mainstream media stems from the typical journalist’s stubborn ignorance about basic military matters. Jack Kelly offers new yet familiar examples.
If you’re wondering whether the mainstream media has yet begun to report accurately on conditions in Iraq, here’s more proof that they haven’t.
Courtesy of Captain’s Quarters, a bold attempt by ABC News to throw mud on President Bush’s Inauguration … discovered on their website by bloggers:
For a possible Inauguration Day story on ABC News, we are trying to find out if there any military funerals for Iraq war casualties scheduled for Thursday, Jan. 20.
If you know of a funeral and whether the family might be willing to talk to ABC News, please fill out the form below[.]
Disgusting. Any spin trying to downplay this is demolished by the fact that ABC deleted the web page once they’d been exposed. Captain’s Quarters cached a copy before ABC could destroy the evidence.
How is it that Google News considers Democratic Underground a news site … but not Free Republic?
Here’s what you get when you search for “democrat OR republican” using the Democratic Underground as the source. Here’s the same search with Free Republic as the source.
UPDATE: Looks like my chance discovery turned out to be timely. Michelle Malkin’s got a budding roundup of posts on Google’s apparent bias. Amy Ridenour’s speculation about Google’s screening algorithms sounds plausible to me, but I don’t forsee Google letting us in on anything revealing about their search algorithms. Ater all, that’s what made them so popular as a search engine to begin with, and their popularity drives their ad revenues.
Mick Stockinger at Uncorrelated observes that algorithms don’t conspire to slant the news. Granted. But algorithm writers certainly can. I’m not saying that Google did any such thing … I am saying that Democratic Underground’s presence in Google News’ search results strikes me as a bit odd given Free Republic’s absence.
Whatever happened to the breathless coverage of important news stories like the tons of missing ammo in Iraq? George Bush’s AWOL escapades and the documents that proved it? Karl Rove’s leaking of an undercover CIA operative’s name for political advantage? The Bush Administration’s reckless indifference to Richard Clarke’s prescient warnings about the imminent danger of a 9/11 attack? Bush’s nefarious backroom conspiracies in cahoots with the Saudi royal family and the bin Ladens?
Golly, I thought these were all Critically Important Stories™ that the public needed to know about in every detail. Suddenly, after November 2nd, things have gone quiet. I wonder why.
Power Line’s Deacon ponders the results of the media brushfire they fanned into life:
Blogs like ours don’t compete with national newscasts. We don’t try to summarize the national and world news, and we attempt investigative journalism only intermittently. We’re more like opinion journals.
Blogs can only inflict significant damage on network news organizations to the extent that these organizations utter flagrant falsehoods or otherwise commit major inexcusable errors. When networks run slanted stories that always favor the liberal cause, we serve a worthwhile function by exposing the slant and the consistency of the bias. But this does no major harm to the networks.
Arguably, then, blogs pose no inherent danger to the networks. Networks merely need to avoid uttering flagrant falsehoods and committing major inexcusable errors. Then they can continue to slant things in the liberal direction without taking any deadly hits from bloggers.
Will we ever again see a major network that gains general trust as a non-partisan source of news? I’m pretty sure we won’t. It’s a daunting task, and the incentive for undertaking it is not obvious. The old “most trusted man in America model” model was an anomaly — the product of a breath-taking new technology with enormous “centralizing” tendencies, coupled with a post World War II political consensus. That consensus no longer exists, and we now have a breath-taking new technology with enormous decentralizing tendencies.
Read the whole thing.
UPDATE: Instapundit chimes in.
Hugh Hewitt remarks on the power of the tail.
OpinionJournal recaps the trends in media power, which is news only to the most non-web-savvy readers of the WSJ … but at least they’re hearing it now.
Michelle Malkin delivers an Old Media eulogy.
I’ve been pointing out the Cleveland Plain Dealer‘s embargo on news addressing John Kerry’s lies about his service in Vietnam, and I don’t plan to stop. To this day, the only article that even mentions John Kerry’s “Christmas in Cambodia” lie is this one, which gently skims the surface thus:
Kerry also said in the Senate in 1986 that he entered Cambodia on secret missions, which would have been illegal, and in other accounts he specifically recalled being there on Christmas Eve, 1968, a memory “seared” in his mind.
Fellow officers and living commanders said he was 55 miles from the Cambodian border and never entered Cambodia.
They also criticize him for associating President Nixon with the alleged Cambodian incursions of 1968, since Nixon didn’t take office until 1969.
Kerry adviser Michael Meehan said on Friday that Kerry was “near and around the border” on Dec. 24, 1968 – Christmas Eve – and “for certain he transported Special Operations folks into Cambodia” other times.
It’s been over two weeks since the accusations surfaced, and it sure looks like they’re trying to hold out for another 74 days.
As I predicted yesterday, today’s PD has reported nothing about the most damning news: Kerry’s “Christmas in Cambodia” lie, which Kerry’s campaign was forced to admit as such. There are six stories today mentioning John Kerry, and not a one of them even touches the Cambodia story. The PD focuses on “medals, medals, medals” when the explosive story is “Cambodia, Cambodia, Cambodia.” Don’t even get me started on Kerry’s magic hat and his adventures in gun-running. This guy’s another Walter Mitty masquerading as a presidential nominee, but apparently that’s not news around here.
I’m forced to conclude that the Plain Dealer is trying to protect their candidate, John Kerry. Rather than mention the news that’s finally breaking into public view (depite furious mainstream media spin), the PD continues to abdicate its responsibility to report it. Instead, they run a single AP article reporting on Kerry’s speech yesterday (“parroting Kerry’s speech” would be a more accurate description). But at least the AP wrote something, which beats the PD’s non-effort.
I did find one mention of Kerry’s “Christmas in Cambodia” lie in today’s paper … in a letter to the editor by Corrie Bergeron of Eastlake, Ohio. Bravo, Corrie! You’ve managed to do more reporting on the biggest political story around than the nation’s twentieth largest newspaper.
UPDATE: More here.
Arthur Chrenkoff brings us “Good news from Iraq, Part 4.” Amen.