The Invisible Check Boxes The Media Won't Describe

[elfs]

Yesterday, NPR reporter David Folkenflik was interviewing ABC reporter Chris Cuomo about the Andrew Weiner case: "As a journalism exercise, this was a very fascinating endeavor because it checks all the boxes for difficulty in journalism: Subject matter, difficult. There's a taste issue, there's a morality issue, there's an impact issue."

To hear Cuomo say that enraged me in ways that are hard to describe.

First: There's an impact issue? This is right up there with Clinton's blowjob in regards to how it affects the man's performance as a politician. It doesn't! What Weiner does on the 'net and with his personal life is sorta irrelevant. It may make him the butt of jokes, but that's about it. His constituency will have a chance to decide how they feel about their dirty-minded congressman in a few months, but the rest of us shouldn't have a say. I suspect the women in his district will flee him, but most men who care to vote have embraced their inner horndog enough to know Weiner isn't any different than anyone else.

There is no impact issue. Dan Savage is right: if David "Family Values" Vitter can keep his seat after being caught with a prostitute while wearing diapers and lying about it, Anthony Weiner can keep his seat as well.

Second: All the check boxes for difficulty in journalism? Where's this checklist? I want to see it. I want to see where the checkboxes read

• Confrontation with authority
• Speaking truth to power
• Exposing rank hypocrisy

I bet all of those have only one checkbox, in the third column, "Impossible."

Really, when was the last time the so-called liberal media confronted a sitting administration about anything?

Comments

[technoshaman.livejournal.com]

Dick Nixon.

That was the last time.

And, oh, boy did they cover it. More than OJ, by an order of magnitude. I don't know if you remember that; I did. I was a wee lad, and I remember being TICKED that none of my favorite shows were on because somebody was mad at the President. But I also remember the reason they threw him out: He broke the public trust.

Ye gods and little fishies, I wish they enforced that nowadays. *so* many people, both sides of the aisle, would be flippin' burgers.

The US media is a very bad joke

[shunra.livejournal.com]

I think it draws its forms from court jesters - entertainment, not information.

Information is boring. All the ways of engaging with information have been demonized in U.S. culture as 'not fun' and 'geeky' - which, despite later developments in meaning, still carries the stench of a carnival side-show.

I suppose that's one way to protect the powerful elites against the ravages of the will of the people: drug 'em. With religion and entertainment and recreational alcohol, until they no longer know which side is up.

Have things been getting a whole lot more _entertaining_ since the civil rights movement? ::sigh::

Sorry, must share:

[elfs.livejournal.com]

Apparently (http://youtu.be/FsqJFIJ5lLs).

Stupid LJ and their stupid embed rules.

Re: Sorry, must share:

[shunra.livejournal.com]

We, the people, are so screwed. :-(

It doesn't have to be this way, it really doesn't. At least our samizdat is pretty good.

[darrelx.livejournal.com]

Weiner's character is not to be judged by the act of sexting lewd photos to girls, but rather by the despicable act of the cover-up after he was caught.

Specifically, the slander against twitter and the attempts to discredit those responsible for outing him. That, and that alone, is what makes him less than suitable for the job, and he should resign immediately.

Had he come out and said he was sorry for his indisrection from the start, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Same goes for Clinton's Oval-office B.J. If he didn't lie about it, there wouldn't be anywhere solid to go with it.

[caraig.livejournal.com]

I absolutely agree. It's one thing for a politician to do something of debatable morality; it's quite another to lie about it. Weiner's antics to try and cover it all up in more and more elaborate ways just made this more and more sad and wrecked the trust people had in him.

It's even more damning when the politico isn't just doing something for their own pleasure, and instead harms his constituents directly. How much more so when what the politician does gets citizens killed? Breach of trust is made all the worse when there's more than just frat-boy antics going on.

Scalzi has a good post on the topic

[lemur123.livejournal.com]

"Scenario: You’ve just done something physically and/or emotionally intimate with another consenting adult human being who is not your spouse/partner.

So, gonna tell your partner?

a) Yes.

b) Any other response.

If the answer is “b,” then there’s a really excellent chance you’re cheating."

http://whatever.scalzi.com/2011/06/08/how-to-know-if-youre-cheating/

Please help to decide if I should buy this website

[(Anonymous)]

Happy weekend, sorry to bother you, I just see that members have alive discussion here.
I am looking for someone with an experience of BUILDING MONEY MAKING WEBSITES? I made some cash with GOOGLE ADSENSE before but not much. My friend has suggested to purchase a buy online ebay at 999webdesign.com (here is URL if you are lazy to type it, [url=http://999webdesign.com/]direct link - "INTERNET BUSINESS FOR SALE")[/url] - I hope it can work! It looks like they are making good MONEY MAKING SITES. Don't you mind share your opinion and experience? I was not able to find a good looking
FREE AFFILIATE SOFTWARE and 999webdesign.com sounds reliable. Many thanks!