Sunday Discussion Group

June 25, 2006

About a month ago, Greg Sargent wrote a terrific item on recent criticism of progressive blogs from of the D.C. media establishment.

In recent weeks, one member after another of the D.C. media establishment has gone out of his way to depict bloggers as hysterical, angry and destructive. To hear them tell it, bloggers sitting at their computers are akin to squalling brats in high-chairs chucking baby food at their sober, serious elders — i.e., major figures at the established news organizations.

Not long ago, The Washington Post’s Jim Brady lamented “blog rage.” Joe Klein’s latest column complained about “vitriol” and “all the left-wing screeching.” Former Bill Clinton press secretary Mike McCurry recently told us that reporters are complaining they feel “intimidated” because “most of the blogosphere spends hours making them feel that way.” And a CBS opinion piece recently asked: “Does noise trump contemplation in the blogosphere?”

That was in May. In June, it’s picked up considerably. On Thursday, the Washington Post’s David Broder rejected “liberal bloggers,” claiming that “the blogs I have scanned are heavier on vituperation of President Bush and other targets than on creative thought.” Today, the New York Times’ David Brooks, while specifically lashing out at Kos, characterized liberal bloggers as “small-minded,” and described sites as “squadrons of rabid lambs [who] unleash their venom on those who stand in the way.”

And then, of course, there’s the ugly fight The New Republic picked with Kos, which ultimately led to this thoughtful reaction to the medium from Lee Siegel, the magazine’s culture writer:

It’s a bizarre phenomenon, the blogosphere….nightmare of populist crudity….hard fascism with a Microsoft face….fascistic forces….beyond the thuggishness, what I despise about so many blogurus, is the frivolity of their “readers.”….The blogosphere’s fanaticism is, in many ways, the triumph of a lack of focus.

What on earth is going on here? What’s fueling all this anti-blog rage? Jealousy? Elitism? And if blogs are written and read by fringe ideologues that don’t matter, why are all these major media personalities so worked up?

For that matter, are we witnessing an awkward transition period that will improve in the not-too-distant future, or will the relationship between blogs and traditional news outlets deteriorate further?

June 25, 2006 at 9:45 am

The media have to be feeling squeezed right now. Remember, they’ve spent the last twenty years shifting their stories into right wing memes since talk radio took off. Years of being decried as “the liberal media,” from Goldwater forward, have taken their toll. At first, they scoffed at the Goldwaters and Nixons of the world. But over time, their stories have become increasingly sympathetic to such figures as this notion of liberal media bias has taken hold. They go out of their way to be un-liberal.

Well, liberals have had enough. We have found our pushback medium, and we are taking advantage. And now the media are reacting to us the way they reacted to the initial conservative push to paint them as liberal. We’re calling them on their failure to deliver real news that does more than play “he said, she said,” and we’re calling them on their willingness to adopt conservative talking points or labels and treat them as facts.

I finally saw An Inconvenient Truth last night, and one startling statistic was that a representative sample of 928 scientific peer review articles on global warming yielded zero skeptics. I.e., nearly the entire scientific community is in agreement. But a similar sample from the same timeframe, this one of media coverage of the issue, yielded different results. Of the 638 sampled articles, 53% depicted scientific controversy over the issue. (I’m recalling the number of articles from memory, so that may not be perfect.)

We are fed up with this sort of behavior. We are no longer willing to accept a media establishment that bends over backward to be friendly to Republicans because they are scared of being called “liberal.”

So that’s why the anti-blog rage. Certainly elitism is part of it, but I think it’s really that we’re pushing them in a way they aren’t used to being pushed, and like we might expect, they are reacting badly to it.

Here’s the good news: talk radio and the Right Wing Noise Machine succeeded. And we can succeed, too. If we keep the pressure up and demand better performance on their part, we will get it. I think this is very much an “awkward transition period,” so long as we are not cowed by the media’s whining.

Remember the old world maps, when vast swaths of the earth were still undiscovered territories to western civilization?

“Here there be Dragons!”

TradMedia, in an effort to secure a dwindling reader base, wants to scare away the timid from blogs. Like any rearguard action the effort smacks of desperation. Think of a cornered animal.

What’s fueling all this anti-blog rage? Jealousy? Elitism?

Fear.

“Punditry” used to be based on intelligence and reasoning. Whether you agreed with James Kilpatrick or William F. Buckley, you cannot deny they were intelligent and consistent conservative. You can’t say that about David Brooks.

“Reporting” used to actually be about news and facts, not process stories and horse races.

Ditto political operatives – wrapped up in power games, ignoring the voters.

The blogs make it abundantly clear that pundits are now party shills, not intellectuals, and that reporters are more focused on the gossip than on the facts.

And Kos had the audacity to point out that Bob Shrum and Marshall Wittman can’t manage to WIN ELECTIONS, thus endangering their cash flow.

Fear. It’s a hard rain gonna fall.

Geez—give the guy a day or two off, and he comes back with a vengeance. Welcome back, Steve!

First things first….

***What on earth is going on here? What’s fueling all this anti-blog rage? Jealousy? Elitism? And if blogs are written and read by fringe ideologues that don’t matter, why are all these major media personalities so worked up?***

One word: FEAR. yep—the “professional personalities” are afraid that a fresh wind might clear the smoke, topple the mirrors, and expose the tiny little lapdogs (think “Mr. Chew” from the animated film “Madagascar” here) that have been posing as “journalists” these past few years. They’re afraid that truth might bring down their happy-talk background. They’re afraid that people can get news from sources other than their wee little castles. It’s just the early symptoms of something once lebelled “Bunker Mentality.”

***For that matter, are we witnessing an awkward transition period that will improve in the not-too-distant future, or will the relationship between blogs and traditional news outlets deteriorate further?***

Bunker Mentality, once it sets in, has only three possible resolution-scenarios. First, the “bunkered-down individual/group” can come out of the bunker, and fight on until victory is ultimately achieved. Obviously, this just isn’t going to happen, as is seen in the New Rethuglic assault. They did about as good as the Germans during the ’44 “Bulge” offensive. Lots of talk; very little walk. Second, they can get their collective acts together, admit the grievous wrongs they’ve committed against the American People by siding with the freakazoid uberschweinen or this most recent administration, and rejoin the human race. That won’t happen either—remember, they’re converts to the Kool Aid dietary regimen of the GOP. To rebel is to be left out in the cold, with nowhere to go. Third—and hopefully, the most likely of options—they’ll stay huddled up in their collective bunkers, and keep right on flailing away at the blogosphere. It’ll give the Left a lot of free advertising, and In think it’ll gradually bring more and more people into the virtual realm of hard, honest journalistic discussion. Iganine—open debate that’s beyond the control of the MSM tail-tuckers; beyond the grasp of the New Rethuglic; over the top of Bill “Lie-like-a-dog” O’Ruffian; beyond the control of the Frist-and-Bones show on the Hill.

Obviously, the “professionals” are noticing that their pancake-makeup doesn’t hide the wrinkles any more….

“It’s a bizarre phenomenon, the blogosphere. It radiates democracy’s dream of full participation but practices democracy’s nightmare of populist crudity, character-assassination, and emotional stupefaction. It’s hard fascism with a Microsoft face,”

I guess participatory democracy is only good when the other side is practicing it and not when you personally are experiencing it, eh?

Several things are going on with respect to the level of vitriol the MSM is directing towards the blogosphere.

First, authenticity. The blogosphere represents a more authentic communication from the bottom up and the MSM has entirely failed to reflect the concerns, fears, and beliefs, of the bottom up (or you could call them the grassroots, for that matter). The MSM has failed to speak truth to power. In particular, they did not challenge any of the administration’s untruths.

Second, intellectualism vs. grassroots level. The MSM has become the domain of the intellectual classes. Journalists are recrutited from Ivy League campuses and go to grad schools such as Columbia. The chattering classes have become divorced from the concerns of bloggers as a result.

Third, the MSM understands that their position is being threatened by the blogosphere. Nobody has appointed or certified the MSM as the official communicators, messengers, and news carriers. In the 1950s, 60s, and 70s, they were seen as the offical gospel in terms of the news. Now, they are now being confronted with someting similar to viral news via the Internet and frequently what people are discussing in terms of the news is not what the MSM has chosen to focus on or parrot the administration’s line.

Analogy warning —

MSM practioners spend little time in the blogosphere, so they get an incomplete picture of what goes on. Yes, there is rage. But, the more you explore the blogosphere, the more you come across thoughtful viewpoints. And on the left-side of the blogosphere, there is a lot of tolerance for diversity of viewpoints–if the time is taken to lay out the rationale.

MSM practioners commenting on the blogosphere is akin to me commenting on life in France–a place I never been.

They are fighting a loss of control. It is like the blacksmith venting against the horseless carrage. Once this cathartic period of rage is over, look for them to try to co-opt the blogsphere.

This can only be a good thing. It will drive curious MSM readers/viewers to the blogs to see what the fuss is all about. Then they may be amazed and delighted by the information and discussion they find there and join the movement! I agree this attack is fear-driven–fear of loss of influence and control. But also I think it’s a fear of losing readership/viewers which leads to loss of advertisers and revenue which makes publishers and corporate owners more than a little nervous.

I’m sure it’s a bit of fear, jealousy and other reasons stated above, but I think it’s societal and cultural as well. Society is inherently conservative and by that I mean it’s slow to change. The MSM shouldn’t be looked at any differently. In general, people don’t like change and they’re wary of anything new. The blogosphere hasn’t been around for that long and only in the last year has gotten a big boost and I think the MSM is still trying to figure them out. However, having said that, look at who’s criticizing the blogosphere. It’s mainly inside-the-Beltway folks. They are the most conservative of the MSM. Look at other newspapers and media outlets and see if they view the blogs the same way.

Blogs shoot from the hip, preach to the converted, and assume that readers already understand most of any story’s background. This is true even of the best blogs, and it’s the exact opposite of what traditional journalists are forced to do. A traditional journalist reading any blog must say over and over again, “I’d get fired if I wrote that.”

At the same time, it’s hard to believe that journalists don’t occasionally wish they could write with the freedom of blogs. They wish they could write what they suspect as well as what they can prove; they wish they could rip into people who’ve pissed them off; they wish they could stop being ploddingly cautious. But they’ve internalized all the self-censorship (often for excellent reasons, like the risk of being sued), and so they see bloggers as carefree irresponsible children who haven’t yet learned to behave.

In other words, bloggers remind journalists of themselves when they were wet-behind-the-ears college kids with actual ideals. The journalists have been forced to kill or repress that part of their personality in order to keep their jobs and respectability. Of course they’re enraged that anyone could gain the public ear without paying the same price.

But there’s a second characteristic of traditional journalism that makes the situation even worse. Journalists are all indoctrinated into the belief that they can “get to the heart of a story” in just a few minutes, no matter what the background. This dates back to their days as cub reporters: in the morning you interview some award-winning fly-fisherman, in the afternoon you talk to a great-grandmother who hooks rugs. Then you confidently write articles as if you’ve grasped the heart of fly-fishing and rug-hooking.

But it’s not true. Whenever I read an article by one of these “drive-by” reporters on a subject I know well, it pains me how badly the reporter gets the facts wrong or completely misses the point. It’s impossible to get to the heart of a story without a deep appreciation of the background…yet every day reporters are assigned to do exactliy that, and must convince themselves that they can deliver the central truth of something that they knew nothing about five minutes earlier.

For the sake of their own egos, journalists must buy into the myth of their own instant insights. These are people who can watch the first ten minutes of a single Bollywood musical, then write an article as if they’ve discerned all the inner truths of Indian cinema.

So now the spotlight has turned onto blogs: an ongoing multi-voiced conversation that’s been taking place 24/7 for at least five years. We all know the blogosphere is a complicated place with its own vocabulary, thousands of in-jokes and linguistic short-hands, flamboyant public images that may or may not match private personalities, a wide spectrum of participants from Nobel-prize-winning professors to pig-ignorant teenagers…a complex nuanced moving target that no one can possibly grasp in its entirety.

So David Broder spends ten minutes reading a few pages and believes he’s seen through to the absolute inner truth. Write it up and on to the next article.

The blogs promised so much to me in my search for some indication that democracy wasn’t dead in this country, but, what I have found over the past 6 years since I began my quest in 2000, during the election, is that what promised so much has delivered only a fraction of the depth of ideas and thinking which should be fueling democratic discourse.

Labels, epithets, emotional language and knee-jerk reactions are the norm. There is little reasoned thinking, or any thinking at all on many blogs. I consider myself a “liberal” thinker, open to ideas which might advance freedom as well as honor our Constitutiional rights. But, other than just two or three sites, there is little to hang my hopes on that this great country of ours hasn’t sunk into a mire of slanderous attacks on anyone who disagrees with this point or that, into shouting, no, screaming at each other over the microchips. What was described as “soft fascism” is not far off the mark.

As a Democrat, I fear this will not convince anyone who is a
wavering Republican to vote for Democratic candidates. We simply have to be as Ghandi put it, “the change we wish to see in the world.” To descend to Karl Rove’s or Ann Coulter’s level will not achieve anything. It pulls legitimate criticsm away from creating reasonable solutions in an atmosphere of mutual concern and respect. We are all Americans. We need to act like we understand what that means and from whence our licence to be citizens comes.

First, let’s start with the obvious. The Republican and Washington insider sides (almost the same thing but not quite) of pre-internet media outlets are going to attack left-leaning blogs because they’re a threat to their power, period.
More significantly, I think, is that what I find most useful about blogs as a reader is a threat to ALL reporters. Forget their lost monopoly on commentary (who’d read Broder if they could read Digby?), the next step is losing their monopoly on information gathering.
I like the left blog community because one meets a lot of people who know stuff, specialists in important disciplines, the law, economics, business. In other words, I get insights into worlds I know nothing about from insiders whose information, once I discount for our shared political bias, I trust.
The blogs help turn readers into reporters. You can see why news organizations wouldn’t care for that.

Let me take a slightly different approach, in that I think I am willing to give the MSM the underlying premise. They claim the blogosphere contains rage, vituperation, thuggishness and (somewhat of a contradiction) frivolity.

If I have to defend the entire blogosphere, I can only say “guilty as charged.” Now if only when I call the MSM on being sterile, effete and biased, they too would admit guilt.

I have great certainty that I can go find countless blogs full of exactly what these critics complain of. (Some days, I might even find a little of it here, but not very often – but we wont tell anyone!) Where they go wrong is that this is not an indictment of “the blogosphere” or “blogurus.”

1) The blogosphere is extremely diverse, by nature — moreso than the “MSM” (where the first M’s entire purpose os to connote something narrow). To find some blogs whose entire purpose is (or has unintentionally become) venting for its own sake does not negate the existence of sites like this, which I note have not been mentioned in those critques.

2) The blogosphere doesn’t have to play by the same rules, and shouldn’t. If I’m David Broder and run 2 columns a week that have to please editors and fit a set number of column inches, I cant afford “frivolity” in my writing. But if he looked at my comments here on the “wrong” day, he might see me being very frivolous. I can afford to stop by on a busy day and make a smart-ass one liner in a thread without worrying that it defines my contributions — because the next day and I come here and write a thoughtful, analytical piece. The MSM by and large doesn’t have that luxury. Similarly, we say a lot of things that cant be repeated in a “family newspaper.” BUt the flip side is that we express intensity that MSM lacks — and frankly, the MSM knows this is a limitation in the marketplace. In a way this is like the fight between the Networks and Cable. Even as people decry the coarseness of cable – the sex, the violence, the weird stuff — cable eats network TV’s lunch. Like cable, we make the most of a different set of rules and a different audience composition. That isn’t wrong, that’s just smart adaptation.

3) They can complain all they want, but it works – and if they were interested in fairness, they’d admit it. Blogs didn’t invent the use of media for jacked-up ranting. Rush Limbaugh and his even smaller-market, low-power right-wing nutjobs on talk radio beat us to it by a decade or two. You want vitriol? Listen to talk radio. You want “fascistic”? Listen to talk radio. And while I have complained about such radio (much like the MSM complains about us) the reality is that it works, and has killed us in countless elections. Why shine the spotlight on our side as we try to catch up in terms of having a place for our activists to sound off, to hear a little echo now and then while testing ideas and refining rhetoric?

The MSM critques unfairly because they are trying to force us to play by their rules. Why should we? This is a different medium, a different market. That may make them jealous, it may annoy them that they no longer have a monopoly on information or its ditribution, or the commentary on that information. I think the critques just make them look petty (not unlike network’s complaints about cable). there will always be a place for them, and frankly it isn’t a place we want.

In the end, however, i just doubt these critics ever stopped by here on a good day. Not to pat my own (and our own) backs, but I think ew stand out as a shining counter-example to most of the criticism.

There is little reasoned thinking, or any thinking at all on many blogs.

THEN DON’T READ THEM.

Darwinian selection will do the rest. And you don’t have to risk getting calluses from all that hand-wringing.

Bloody concern trolls…

I’m too hung over to say anything of substance this time. But, “squadrons of rabid lambs [who] unleash their venom”? Rabid venomous lambs? Sheesh… that’s some fine writin’ thar.

War of the Worlds

In the blue corner is the blogosphere, the working of a massive collective electronic mind where each blogger is a neuron, each connected to a specific neural network, forming a larger consciouness. It is self generated, and it is free of commercial filters.

In the red corner is the the shadow government of big money interests, controlling content and opinion with varied success on a continuum from Fox to NPR.

Tune it to see how it will play out but asymmetrical warfare come to mind. Wasn’t the internet created initially to respond to national disasters?
The hijacking of our democracy seems to qualify.

There’s one thing which I believe has been left out, and it’s the very thing which keeps my list of blogs-regularly-visted quite a short one: the commenters. A good deal of valuable stuff is written at Kos’ blog — volumes of good stuff. But the comments range from bland and knee-jerk to insulting and rabid. Atrios gets a lot of nutsy comments too. So does Kevin Drum. They’re places I avoid now for just that reason.

Lee Siegel makes a good point about the readers and commenters. Of course one thing we could throw back at both newspapers and TV is that they’re one-way streets. They pick and choose their comments from readers/viewers they want to print or read on the air; bloggers don’t . We can go back and edit out any comments which we find irrelevant or nasty or destructive.. when we have time. In the meantime, they get read and they get associated with our blog, for good or ill.

Bloggers might also point MSM in the direction of Rush Limbaugh and O’Reilly on the radio and Glenn Beck and Savage and ask if liberal bloggers and their commenters are anywhere near as vicious.

MSM’s yadda-yadders remind me a little bit, in this context, of prep school kids who worry about the crudeness of the society their campus protects them from, though they don’t mind sneaking out for a cold one now and then and watching the hoi polloi in action.

There’s some pretty astounding research and writing happening here online. And some very cool places for hungry intellectuals to hang out. And they do. As for Harvardy-Yalie media, I see a great deal more “red brick” (vs. “ivy”) in the media than there used to be. Ivy seems to grow pretty dense these days around think tanks. I don’t think intellectuals and grassroots are separate — in fact I think one of the things Yearly Kos made quite clear was just that, from what I saw.

One interesting thing about the charge of “elitism” is that it’s really about a fear of people who dare to think for themselves. Thinking for oneself is not something politicians on the right are willing to do these days — and I think Washington Dems now fall into that group. Intellectual independence is certainly not something the media cater to. And definitely something which is antithetical to oligarchy. But it gets a good deal of stimulation from any give-and-take — which these days can be found in in abundance in the interactive media.

And it’s not just the blogs that have the MSM pundits worried, it’s any outspoken fresh voice that points out the obvious lies and contradictions of politicians—a task that MSM has, for the most part, assiduously avoided. Look at Richard Morin’s attempted take-down of Jon Stewart’s “The Daily Show” in yesterday’s WaPo. True, Morin cherry-picked the report and misrepresented the report, but it was clear he was worried and desperate. The old song-and-dance the MSM has mastered is not so appealing anymore, and particularly not to the young—tomorrow’s voters. So we see lots of panic being expressed as dignified regret at the writing of the blogosphere—which, by and large, they do not read or follow.

I think it is the loss of their intellectual base that is frightening the punditocracy. After all, if grand mothers like me are reading blogs rather than the MSM to find out what is going on, it is because the MSM has failed to tell us. The traditional readership of most newspapers and news mags is relatively well educated old coots like me. If the circulation numbers of the paper media are decreasing just as the baby boomers are moving into old cootdom, it must mean the old coots aren’t reading the paper media. The MSM are in trouble, since the major consumers of their product (i.e. old coots) are turning to the internet and the blogs to keep up to date. The younger coots were already a lost cause to the MSM, but the old coots have the real monetary clout, and they are leaving the MSM in the dust.

To be honest, word on the street is that the demise of MSM — well, at least the newspapers — is not quite what it seems. What’s happening is that they are barreling along with plenty of advertising revenues and new subscribers. The money squeeze comes from the market where shareholders are demanding greater and greater profits. Used to be 15% was a great deal. Now, the newspaper parent companies are finding their stock is considered semi-worthless compared to some of the high flyers. So — ’tis said — blame the shareholders who are — in large part, I guess — institutional investors who have a lot of people putting the screws to them.

But having read Carol’s comment (11.34 a) I wanted — as a fellow old coot — to add that yesterday I read through Lichtblau/Risen’s piece on SWIFT — read it through carefully twice because I was doing to do an exegesis for my own blog showing the a) often slippery writing, and b) holes in the narrative. Frankly I’m too lazy to do it and have moved on to other subjects. Usually I’m an admirer of these guys, but I think that reading a Times piece is occasionally like eating one of those chicken salad sandwiches from the fridge at the QuikMart out there at the treeless corner of highways 163 and 22 — you don’t know how long the sandwich has been around, you don’t know what the ingredients really are, and there’s a lot more Wonder bread and mayo than chicken if indeed chicken it is…

In this latest MSM assault on the blogosphere, has anyone noticed that these attacks say nothing whatsoever about rightwing blogs? I’ve never seen anything on Kos or anywhere else in the lefty world that compares with the relentness vileness that is commonplace on Little Green Footballs, to give just one example, or on talk radio every fucking day. Along with everything else in this attack, we see once again the usual double standard: IOKIYAR.

I’m a 48-year-old moderate Democrat who was a journalist in another life, and the Daily Kos is the first thing that I read every day. I have no faith in the MSM anymore. I love ideas, and the liberal bloggers have a lot of them. I also don’t understand the “blog rage” comment–directed toward these progressive bloggers. Haven’t we listened to the anger and rage of rightwing hate radio and the Republican Congress for more than a decade? Or has that become background noise? The Republicans still speak with anger and they control all the marbles. I think it’s about time true progressives speak with anger and truth. The Republicans are destroying our country, and the liberal bloggers are the only ones who care.

Time is running out for humanity….

And we have an administration that SIMULTANEOUSLY chooses to war with Iraq AND ignore global warming.

Folks…

That is not like twiddling thumbs in the face of danger.
Rather, it is like yanking your arms and legs off at their very sockets.

One:
What more evidence do you need for the necessity of rage?

Two:
Never underestimate the power of social rage.

Three:
If you do not rage now at the corporate-policital machine… when will you? Tomorrow, when it is too late?

Four:
There are all kinds of ways to rage.
You can rage creatively.
You can even rage analytically.
But rage you must.
Passion you must.
Now you must.

It is now or never for humanity.

Either global warming becomes
THE ISSUE in 2008,
OR ALL IS LOST.

I think there are several currents to the MSM attitude toward blogs. For reporters, we’re thousands of eyes looking over their shoulders, with no hesitation to correct them, or even ridicule them when they’re really far off base. Resentment of this is pretty much basic human nature. Besides, without the reporters, the blogs would have much less to talk about.

It’s something entirely different with the pundit class. They are facing their growing irrelevance. If the chattering heads offered us compelling or interesting insight, fewer of us would have gone looking for it elsewhere.

They have a great gig and do not want to get off the gravy train. All they have to do is keep up with the conventional wisdom that percolates out of the DC cocktail circuit, and in turn they are presented as serious, thoughtful people and paid handsomely. Who wouldn’t want that gig? And who wouldn’t fight like hell to keep it? What the blabbering dolts don’t realize is that the more they scream about the liberal blogs, the more irrelevant and out of touch they appear.
MSM will always have pundits. The present generation of them are turning into dinosaurs right before our eyes.

Elitism is a large part of it. Another large part is simple misunderstanding of the language of the medium. A lot of politics is discussed in bars and on street corners. The language of those discussions is considerably cruder and more visceral than the language of uptown gentlemen’s clubs. A basic skill that any writer is supposed to acquire is to be fluent in many different voices.

The two parts play off each other, of course. The punditocracy is elitist. They sit in their uptown gentlemen’s clubs, sipping wine, complaining about the crudity of the hoi polloi. The language of the Internet (not just the blogosphere) is crude.

The difference between the blogosphere and the punditocracy is that most of us in the blogosphere can move back and forth, speaking now the polite language of the club and then the crude language of the Internet. Since the pundits only see us using Internet language, they assume crudity is our only voice.

To me, I see another Rove hand up the puppet MSM’s ass. It’s just the new meme to run with. It’s an election year, and the blogs must be swift boated. I think it’s rather funny, actually. It means that the blogs have become a threat, one that has to have the orchestrated hand of the master to marginalize the already impending impact.

Blogs are here to stay. Wer’re already affecting public opionion, otherwise MSM would not be in the least bit interested in us.

Let’s keep the internet free. Remember, they are still in power, and are notorious for silencing their enemies.

“what I despise about so many blogurus, is the frivolity of their “readers.” ” – Lee Siegal

You talking to me? Are you talking to me, punk? 😉

Actually, it is great the MSM is starting to feel the heat. After years of cowering whenever the right wing called them as a liberal-biased media, now we get to call them a corporate-bought media.

We just need to watch our language, make our arguments soundly, have a little fun on the way, and let them WHINE.

Great topic.

Most of the comments here are pretty much on target and I agree with most of what people said here

But a closer analogy on the relation of blogs to the MSM is guerilla warfare where it is war of information and ideas. What the MSM fails to understand is that blogs are the weapon of the powerless. We are entering the age of 4th Gen Information Warfare where smaller more reactive journalistic entities will provide our information. They want to control what we see and read, but get threatened when we see thru their BS.

The best examples were the response to Net Neutrality and especially Stephen Colbert’s WHCD speech. The MSM at first tried to pretend that it didn’t exist and that SC was a dud compared to the Bush lookalike. Then the blogs started barking (pro and con.) Eventually, the MSM reacted, but poorly. A certain WaPo columnist got skewered when he made his “not funny or fun” defense and then got snotty when he was called out for what he was, a lapdog.

Since then, the MSM has been taking shots at blogs and TDS/TCR while looking like the martini breathed, caviar drooling dense bully lapdogs they are.

“The money squeeze comes from the market where shareholders are demanding greater and greater profits. Used to be 15% was a great deal. Now, the newspaper parent companies are finding their stock is considered semi-worthless compared to some of the high flyers. So — ’tis said — blame the shareholders who are — in large part, I guess — institutional investors who have a lot of people putting the screws to them.” – PW

First, very correct. Stocks are hugely overvalued in the market and if the corporation does not become increasingly more profitable, the stock value will crash and the investors lose.

Second, this is why no media should be owned by corporations. They should be owned by PEOPLE who will take some responsibility for their editorial direction.

In writing dramatic fiction, there is a rule of balance that is crucial to the success of the project: the villain must be worthy of the hero or the hero is diminished. In other words, to have a really good Hero, you have to have a really bad Villain. Also, another rule is that the Villain does not know himself to be a Villain – in the Villain’s mind, he is the Hero, with the absolutely best reasons for what he does.

So, all we “liberal bloggers” wouldn’t be the heroes we are, saving the Republic for posterity and all that, were it not for the villainous media, all of whom see themselves as the heroes with only the best reasons for their heroisim (villainy).

Were I Kos, I would take it as a badge of honor to have the enemies he does. It means he’s effective.

Hey MSM,

The bloggers are writing what the people are saying.

They are somewhat angry at watching their coutry be run into the ground by a bunch of incompetent boobs.

This is generally A GOOD THING as opposed to not giving a $hit.

Maybe you can report on it. Seems to be a big story here.

Yours,

Glen

What on earth is going on here? What’s fueling all this anti-blog rage? Jealousy? Elitism?

Fear

28. Dan,

Great analysis. I think you are spot on about the source of the current MSM frenzy.

I have encountered more thought worth encountering on this blog, just this morning, than I did in my local print media, the Bellingham (WA) Sunday Herald and the combined Sunday Seattle Times and Post-Intelligencer. Annual subscription to those “newspapers” comes to $352. NY Times Select brings the total to over $400. To get The Carpetbagger Report I have but to turn on my computer.

I can get TV news for nothing, but that’s what it’s worth: nothing (unless you take pleasure in watching insecure bouffants smiling and chirping). I haven’t watched it in over a decade. Air America is a breath of fresh air in the world of hate radio, but it can’t begin to expose me to all the stories The Carpetbagger Report points me to every day. And the commenters here run rings about the phone-in folks. No one in any medium cites a set of related background histories of a given topic better than Steve Benen does.

MSM should be scared and enraged. So should those other dinosaurs still claiming their right to rule, political consultants and fund-raisers. This is a new technology and no one knows yet how it will settle into the political fabrick of our nation. But it’s clearly where the action is and will be.

How could anybody in good conscience attempt to destroy Jon Stewart’s Daily show? His recent comments about congressmen are spot on: “The US congress is full of insane jackasses.”

We, the public, have said that all along, but never have had the voice to show why they are jackasses. JS does this as a nightly ritual!!!

Blogs are doing the same thing. Why shouldn’t people be enraged about what is going on in DC? Anyone who has seen the Frontline special about Dick Cheney should be truly HORRIFIED!!! I learned about all this, not from a newspaper, not from watching the news, but from reading blogs!

Keep up the great work everybody!

Also, another rule is that the Villain does not know himself to be a Villain – in the Villain’s mind, he is the Hero, with the absolutely best reasons for what he does.- Tom Cleaver

So True….
The Evil Emperor Bush is so dim that he is not aware that that HE is an occupying power, when he praises the Hungarian freedom fighters saying, “Liberty can not be denied, it can only be delayed”….

“fabrick”?!

As I just commented to Broder, e-mailing him from his column:

Poor little blacksmith, worried about the arrival of cars. Why don’t you retire while you still have some reputation for intelligence left?

Very good, thoughtful comments on this vexing situation. We are really getting hammered by everyone, not just the right wingers. One idea that I haven’t see – forgive me if I missed it – is that liberals haven’t been heard from in any medium for years. Liberalism is all but dead in this country, although the right wingers are still blaming us for all the world’s ills. Then along come the blogs, and the liberals flock to them, and suddenly the media and press are hearing our voices loud and clear. They are stunned, frightened and shocked by these upstarts suddenly telling it like it is. That Bush is a horror. That the MSM are nothing but lapdogs. That the people’s business is being totally ignored by the corporatocracy, and so on, and so on, and so on – a veritable torrent of inconvenient truths. And they resent us and are totally embarrassed by being so rudely awakened.

We would do well, however, to tone down some of the rhetoric and foul language – I’m not talking about this site, where the posts and comments are outstanding and thought provoking.
We shouldn’t give them fuel for their charges. Right now, all
you have to do is go to some of the blogs and quote a few of
the worst comments to “prove” the charges that we’re nothing
but a bunch of foul mouthed rabid dogs.

The msm is going through Kubler-Ross’s 5 stages of grief over the loss of their readership: denial and isolation (NYT wants you to pay to read their opinions), anger (quite a bit of that lately), bargaining (Marcos is beginning to see that), depression, and finally acceptance. The question I have is are they up to progressing to acceptance?

I’m not sure what all the whinging is about. This is how politics has always been played. Markos is the taking just a tiny fraction of the right wing/SCLM heat that Bill Clinton took. If Markos (and the rest of us!) want to play the game, we can expect to be treated the same way. That’s what the right wing does and we all know it.

The Founders said that We The People have a right to speak our minds. They did not say that We The People have a right to have our thoughts and utterances treated with respect.

I hope that Kos doesn’t go all squooshy soft like a Liberal and go stomping out of the picture. I’d rather see a serene and Clintonian reaction even though some of you will call that wishy-washy or “DINO”.

The media reaction to the lefty blogosphere is exactly the same as the media’s response to anything or anyone progressive. Why is this a surprise?

Perhaps they’d respect us more if, like the right-wing blogosphere, we accused them of treason and called for an enraged citizenry to rise up and murder them.

They are getting worked up because the blogs are pissing on their parade. Now you’ve got Karl Rove pissed to. The Slime Machine has been stoked earlier than anticipated. A brick here and a brick there and the house starts getting shaky.

I agree with most of the comments, and it’s a combination of things, fear at being obsolete at the top of the list. Think of how the radio people villified
TV at its inception……the blacksmith reference by Tom was spot on.

Scared of their shadow democrats have so much to be angry about and yet we are so mild and fair. “Perhaps if we act rashly from conviction, we might be in error. We must hold our ranks in civilized lines, while those nasty savages snipe at us from trees”.
It’s a tricky thing to be in a bar room brawl and hold the moral high ground.
How do we defeat the Republicans without becoming slimed?
Bold action can be guided by a moral compass and skill in mind to mind combat..

There are lots of great comments above, and that’s exactly what the punditocracy fears. A single post and its responses can generate a greater diversity and depth of well reasoned analyses than a single pundit can possibly hope to generate. To be sure there is a huge amount of garbage to ignore. Nonetheless, if there’s a useful comparison to be made, a lie to be ferreted out, a weak argument to be nitpicked, a crucial angle to covered, or a critical fact to be noted, connection to be drawn, or implication to be inferred, you can bet that a community of a few dozen of good commentators will get there in minutes or hours, whereas a single pundit is little more than a single decent blog commentator and may never hit that particular target. Moreover, pundits work on a 24 hour cycle. By the time they’ve had their original thought or two and got it in press, a dozen people are likely to have already thought of the same idea and discussed it to death on the internet. It’s impossible for them to be more original or better informed than a group of commentators. The expertise of the internet is unmatchable.

I still subscribe to a newspaper, but a few hours on the internet, and I’m ahead of tomorrow’s newspapers in terms of political news, 1-4 days ahead with respect to science announcements, and editorial pages (formerly my favorite) are scarcely necessary.

Also, if my newspaper gets something wrong or I want to respond, I can write a letter, and once in a while they’ll even print it. Here, I can express myself immediately, and have a higher chance of getting a reponse from someone. That’s instant gratification that the MSM can’t hope to match.

There’s certainly a lot of rage on the internet: the wierd impersonal/personal dynamic of the medium promotes flaming as does the fact that we segregate ourselves into communities of like-minded people plus polar opposites. There is also a huge amount of legitimate anger (heck, in me alone) for the way the MSM has not lived up to its responsibilities, and for the gigantic, reality-denying, IOKIYAR double-standard that the nation has entered, to which the MSM has contributed.

A different take on the elitism charge for the MSM’s attacks on blogs is the question of legitimacy. Folks like Brooks, Broder, Klein et al. feel they have the market cornered on legitimacy in their commentary on topics in the news. Their political connectedness, the mastheads under which they publish and their status as the talking heads that are pulled out to comment whenever a lazy TV producer needs a seat filled on a “news program” purportedly gives these guys a legitimacy that bloggers lack. Who are all of us to pass judgements when we haven’t rubbed elbows with Kalr Rove at Signatures?

A prof in college once commented that the value of a college diploma is that it certifies a graduate as being smart in the eyes of the world. The pundit class feels they are certified smart and news analysis should be left to them. But there is no corner on the market for wisdom and, by the way, who the hell ever annointed any of these guys to be the only craniums that can comprehend the truth of any situation.

Democracy is a marketplace of ideas. People will gravitate towards and away from ideas that either suit or are disagreable to them. Blogs are thriving simply because the market demand more and better though and commentary on this nation’s politcal fortunes than those of a few self-important and self-annointed commenators. The publications these guys have been writing for have, in contrast, been losing readership and market share. This comments section alone has as much sound thought and legitimate commentary as the WaPo, NYT, LATimes or Sunday bobblehead shows. These guys just can’t take they are just another voice in the crowd.

As for the vitriol, reading what the professional chatterers are saying has more vituperative in it than what the bloggers are writing back. In Dick Cheney’s words, these guys sound as if they are in the last throes of their superiority complex. The bloggers have turned the corner to legitimacy and Brooks and his ilk sound more like cornered animals than dispassionate observers of our times.

Michael J. W. Stickings prompted a comment from President Lindsay at this post on 6/22:

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/7751.html

“Something more is going on? Um, yeah, KCinDC, it’s called media consolidation. The CEOs of the few megacorporations that own the MSM are in it for the money, of course, and if anyone thinks that the CEOs don’t influence their networks then I have a quote about Jack Welch (ex-CEO of GE/NBC) for you:”

“In private, Welch was proud to have personally cultivated Tim Russert from a “lefty” to a responsible representative of GE interests. Welch sincerely believed that all liberals were phonies. He took great pleasure in “buying their leftist souls”, watching in satisfaction as former Democrats like Russert and MSNBC’s Chris Matthews eagerly discarded the baggage of their former progressive beliefs in exchange for cold hard GE cash. Russert was now an especially obedient and model employee in whom the company could take pride.”

Comment by President LIndsay — 6/22/2006 @ 5:01 pm

The link is excellent, (if it doesn’t come through here, The Prez’s comment is #22), and reminds us that when the chest of the media cat is cracked, there beats a cold, square, sharp edged heart of platinum, pumping green blood.

PW’s comment above, “One interesting thing about the charge of “elitism” is that it’s really about a fear of people who dare to think for themselves….. Intellectual independence is certainly not something the media cater to. And definitely something which is antithetical to oligarchy.”, also fits in nicely.

As usual, it’s follow the money. The captains of industry take it as a personal and financial affront that anyone or anything would f–k with their system. The Blogosphere is f–king with their system and no reporter who collects her/his check from the corporate Borg-osphere is immune to it’s demands.

Great post and comments.

I’ve been thinking about this since my earlier post and I would like to add that if the MSM played it smart, they’d welcome blogs. There is room for everyone. Blogs certainly are not trying to replace traditional media–we just wish they’d do their jobs better. Print and broadcast media can do things bloggers can’t do and vice versa. Their fear and name-calling is kind of ridiculous.

The corporations who own the media are trying to neutralize the effectiveness of the blogs and keep the truth from being reported. It is “inconvenient” to their only goal of taking over government policy to put more cash in their greedy pockets. The lapdog reporters who fall in line are a disgrace and probably receive a nice bonus.

So many well-reasoned answers to CB’s question here that I won’t rehash–just say I agree and that noise obviously doesn’t trump contemplation on this blog. Fear is the factor at work, yes, a well-founded fear.

I’d just like to add this thought regarding the MSM’s whining about “blog rage”, “vitriol”, and intimidation–what’s wrong with that? Lee Siegel might think of it as ” a bizarre phenomenon, the blogosphere….nightmare of populist crudity…” but I think of it as the free speech of Americans who just can’t take the lies and complacency they see as destroying our country.

And, yes, I’m angry. As angry as Ann Coulter, but certainly not as crazy or vicious or well-rewarded for it. As angry as Rush Limbaugh but not as hypocritical, vicious or well-paid for it. I’m angry at the “reporters” who through laziness, incompetence, and indifference let the Bush administration lie and create “reality without doing their jobs to challenge that propaganda, investigate and inform the public. Cowed insiders, they go along to get along and our country pays the price. Of course they feel uncomfortable and intimidated by people pointing that out. And thank God there’s a nonviolent mechanism to do that.

Of course pundits and MSM hacks are hysterical at the thought that a mere mortal’s analysis could be shown to be just as relevent and compelling (or more so) than anything they have to say. Expressing opinions and analyzing political choices aren’t rocket science. They are the right and duty of every citizen in this country. And if powerlessness and policy inspire rage and threaten their self-satisfied ride on the gravy train, well, that should tell them something.

“What’s fueling all this anti-blog rage? ”

There is no “anti-blog rage”. There is “anti-liberal-blog rage”.

You don’t see Broders and Brooks complaining about the O’Reilly or right wing blogs. They are whining and bitching about liberal blogs.

Liberal blogs are challenging the status quo and the existing dynamic media dynamic that portrays TNR as “liberal” and Joe Lieberman as a “model Democrat”. This has been the media dynamic since the 80s. Liberal hating pundits like Joe Klein are presented by the media as a “balance” to jihadist right wing pundits. Liberals now have the Internet which gives them and outlet to challenge this dynamic. Brooks, Broder, TNR……….all voices of the Media Elite……….don’t like the challenge to the status quo.

Burro’s coment on #48 brings up an interesting though. If the MSM opinion crowd is being paid to marshal and shepherd public opinion to sway toward predetermined viewpoints why wouldn’t they complain about a forum that dilutes their influence? The blogosphere is essentially outsourcing their jobs of influencing the public to folks are at leat as equally effective yet will do the work for much less money.

Okay, I feel better now… When I first started reading blogs, they had relatively small readership (as measured by number of commentors) and, therefore, little influence. Thus, they were either ignored by the MSM or, more likely, the MSM was unaware of them. However, as blogs grew, they gained influence which forced the MSM to notice. When they finally checked out the blogs, they discovered that much of what was being discussed/riduculed was them and they didn’t like it. The sort of immediate and direct accountability to readers provided by blogs is scary to them.

To sum up what I’ve read (and what I haven’t), we’re calling them on their shit, and they don’t like it.

The main stream media is afraid that we might be telling them to Go Fuck Off.

Oh my, was that rude and crude, dear sweet bought-and-paid-for MSM? Well tough shit — fuck off.

Yours truly,

A Pissed Off Lliberal.

What all of these idiots/pundits conveniently ignore is the elephant in the room: virtually all of rage and hate in the blogosphere is in the right-wing blogs, NOT on the left. Again, the punditocricy are showing themselves as true to the Rethug memes… the “angry liberals”…. rather than to the facts.

Bush is butchering thousands and squandering billions, but dammit, Clinton got a blow job and the D.C. whores STILL can’t get over it.

Why is it that millions of men wanted to BE Bill Clinton and millions of women wanted to be WITH Bill Clinton, yet millions of today’s “men” want to be WITH The Royal Buffoon and millions of women can’t stand to even think of The Shrub? Just goes to show that Clinton was a real man that still scares the the crap out of today’s Dumbya ass-kissing pussies that masquerade as war mongers, who can’t come out from under their shaking-like-leafs-in-the-wind sheets. Scared little boys that want to suck up to the bully, so they won’t get the shit beat out of them by that very same bully.

We learned that in Kindergarten, too.

jhupp,

“Here’s the good news: talk radio and the Right Wing Noise Machine succeeded. ”

This is true. You can hate him all you want but Rush succeeded in his mission. He has terrorized the mainstream media and pushed it to the right. So much so that he gets invited to NBC News on election night to do “analysis” and Tim Russerts of the Media Elite treat him like the Pope.

Elite liberals like TNR hate populism and they have helped kill liberal populism. Meanwhile the GOP has embraced populism. They love their Rushes, O’Reilly, Ollies. Liberal blogs are promoting liberal populism. TNR wants to nip it in the bud.

Ignore TNR, ignore the Broders and Brooks. Remember the Right Wing Noise Machine has been very successful.

Dems are waking up
Fair and courteous rules of debate have long been broken.
Pick up a megaphone and shout back!
But hopefully when the chaos clowns are driven from power
Such counter-terrorist tactics will no longer be needed.

“Left” “right” “left” “right in the comments: sounds like military cadence, to me, and it needs only a goosestep to render “populism” into “fascism.” That goosestep is the one-dimensional thinking that blogging and television and newspaper propaganda perpetrates instead of independent thought.

If a really fresh, original political idea was expressed in any medium right now, it would be “killed” by either right or left. That’s the level which Americans have descended to: mindless, robotic ranters. Americans, unfortunately, have the government they deserve.

Farinata X: What you said up in #21: In this latest MSM assault on the blogosphere, has anyone noticed that these attacks say nothing whatsoever about rightwing blogs? I’ve never seen anything on Kos or anywhere else in the lefty world that compares with the relentness vileness that is commonplace on Little Green Footballs, to give just one example, or on talk radio every fucking day. Along with everything else in this attack, we see once again the usual double standard: IOKIYAR.

I got to this wonderful thread late, but it surprised me that there were 20 mostly thoughtful comments on it before someone pointted this out. For sheer outlandish vituperation nobody beats the rightwing blogs, yet the MSM is constantly attacking only the leftie (or even centrist) blogs. Just goes to show how far gone they are into the camp of the right. And now, after twenty years or more of building control over the discourse it’s slipping away from them, and they’re freaking out. Cornered animal indeed! Not only that, but their entire scam is being discussed and revealed every day, like Welch’s comments (which I’ve offered before here) about buying off Tweety and Punkinhead.

So will the imbibers of the MSM buy it and be warned off from checking out the blogosphere? I suppose some will, but as soon as they get a taste of a decent blog or two with thoughtful writers and commenters, they’ll get religion too.

It always slays me how laments about the state of news and commentary these days fall so easily into the good ol’ days trap, as if there wasn’t slander and partisanship and bile in the media before. Check out the 1700s or 1800s in this country. Check out the French “media” about the time of their revolution. Hey, people are people, and they’re going to express their disappointment and dissatisfaction and, yes, their rage in whatever venues they have available. But the cool thing about the Internet and the blogosphere is that it also gives thoughtful and insightful and extremely well-informed individuals a means of reaching the masses easily. And that’s worth wading through an awful lot of ranting to find those diamonds.

Some blogs, of course, have less dross. I won’t mention any names, but… 😉

Paradigm shift.

If we (liberals, liberal blogs) are getting hammered , the effects have been pretty clear to this reader (and blogger). Good blogs are getting better, and liberals/progressives are becoming better informed and more articulate about the kind of country they want us to have. Look at the states which, thanks to Kos and much less well known regional bloggers and blogger-activists, have fielded strong candidates from the left who are doing much better than we would have expected four years ago.

PW, I think that is an excellent point, and another one that puts starkly the chasm between MSM and blogosphere. The MSM, being part and parcel of the “instant gratification” society claims progressive blogs are a failure because all we have to show are better candidates and better showings, but no wins. Of course, they fail to mention how their grossly manipulative coverage of “The Scream” aided (rather than just reporting on) the Dean implosion, to use just one example.

The blogosphere seems more patient: Dean’s long-term 50-state strategy seems to get more support here than among MSM pundits. We seem to recognize that Busby doing well in one of California’s reddest districts was a pleasant surprise, forcing R’s to spend money to protect their base; we recognize that if we can get them spending money defensively, for the first time in many cycles, it improves our chances in many districts where the partisan breakdown is closer.

I believe that time will show that the progressive blogosphere — despite its fits and starts, growing pains, mini-scandals, occasional ranting, and all of the efforts of the MSM to “put us in our place” — has become a de facto think tank for the Democratic party, bringing new energy, new ideas, new networks and new candidates that can only be healthy in the long term.

I think I’m done with this website. CB, if you can’t come up with topics that interest people and if the people here can’t come up with any intelligent thoughts, I’m outta here.

Reality: this site is at the top of my favorites and thanks to all for some really insightful commentary.

What does recent history teach us about ruling elites and the control of information?

Media critique was a powerful current which ran through the Eastern European and Baltic revolutions from the very beginning. Furious protests against manipulative and dishonest media, demands for fair media access for oppositional voices with different views representing other values than the ruling, red bourgeois elite embraced.
[…]
During the eight years that Solidarity was banned, an underground kingdom of over 1500 magazines was established. Every group in the society seemed to have its own oppositional paper dealing with their issues: the taxi drivers, those working on the railways, even the soldiers (those who opposed martial law).

“Also, if my newspaper gets something wrong or I want to respond, I can write a letter, and once in a while they’ll even print it. Here, I can express myself immediately, and have a higher chance of getting a reponse from someone. That’s instant gratification that the MSM can’t hope to match.” – N.Wells

You are so right about getting responses 😉

They are so additictive. It’s great to think the comments you throw out will inspire someone to write back.

Of course, when you post some brilliant, pithy, right-on-the-money comment, and everybody ignores it, the withdrawl symptoms are just devestating 🙁

It’s a dangerous universe that way, but it does encourage you to do your homework so you can defend your opinions.

To be fair to the media, there is a lot of really awful work being done by blogs on both sides of the spectrum. I’ve tried reading most of the other major liberal blogs, including Kos and Huffington, and this is the only one I’ve found that’s worth my time. The traditional media may be in some sense acting to protect its turf, but it also has a very valid point about the lack of quality control in the blogosphere.

Of course pundits and MSM hacks are hysterical at the thought that a mere mortal’s analysis could be shown to be just as relevent and compelling (or more so) than anything they have to say

Many are the times, while reading a column or listening to some talking head, that I have said to myself, “Gee, I could do that.”

You only have to look at these guys to see that they wear fairly decent suits. At least Brooks Bros. if not Brioni. They must drive fairly decent cars ( SUVs, I’ll bet you ) and have fairly decent houses out in the ‘burbs. Back when the dot-com boom was going, they used to talk alot about 401(k)’s ( but they don’t do that so much now, for some reason ).

Yet, I really must assert that I could do what they do. Which is not to put any of you folks down. Any number of comments on this thread could rival what columnists write.

Yes, we bloggers are human – and therefore have out faults. But let us be clear. The MSM allowed the Bush administration to lie its way into Iraq; the blogosphere did not.

Ok, I just wandered downstairs where my wife was flipping through channels and flipped through the MTP replay. The panel (including Broder of course) was discussing “what goes on in the Clinton marriage.”

a) They really dont want to start trading critques with us about each other. Really.

b) Maybe they should get their own house in order before throwing stones?

c) They can have that discussion with a straight face and wonder why blogs are gaining ground? Can they honestly be that dense?

Blogs: Because We Don’t Care About the Clinton’s Marriage.

A lot of good comments, but in the end I am asking myself, “why care?”

Really, nothing the MSM can do will change the trend in blogging. If anything, the bashing just introduces more people to the existance of blogs. You can almost see the last handful of people who even bother with the news saying “gosh, that sounds a lot more interesting than this, I should take a look…”

The MSM gave up on journalism long ago. The entire industry is almost completely bought and paid shills (what I think of as ‘infomercials’) and entertainers (the screaming parody of functioning human brains). The idea of Uncle Walt actually earning your trust and then carefully weilding it (rather it was truly deserved or not) is dead and gone.

Let ’em bitch and whine – it’s free publicity.

-jjf

This is all about Rove. No mention of Little Green Footballs and the real fascists there. No mention of Freepers. No mention of radio talk shows or the persistent propaganda machine known as Fox.

Blogs can’t be controlled like the MSM can. No phone call to an editor can change a headline or move a story up. The elections are coming, folks, and blogs stand to make a real impact, exert some real muscle. And the Broders and TNR’s and Brooks’ are all running scared. I read Kos and when somebody says something stupid on there, I usually think, “that’s stupid,” and let it pass. There is no “leader” on Kos. There is no head to cut off, as Hamilton desired.

Keep the faith, keep posting, and don’t let these jerks rattle our cages.

There was an editorial that the Omaha World Herald printed by Cal Thomas, in which he quotes a former Iraqi newspaper editor about the “false” reporting in Iraq, and how great shit is over there. And his source is a magazine called Commentary.
Sounds legit enough, obviously must be some non-biased political site, with a title like “Commentary”.
Until you go the website, click on About Us, and read:
“Commentary has always taken a special interest in Jewish issues and the state of Israel.”
Now, I wonder exactly what kind of street-cred does an Iraqi have if they’re publishing an article on a website with a “special interest in the state of Israel”?

Where am I going with this? If I have been some person without access to the Interent, reading this Cal Thomas editorial, I would think, “wow, here’s a respectable Iraqi saying things are great over there, and that damn liberal media is just a bunch of liars. That must be true.”

Since I was able to almost immediately search the Web and found out the truth about the “facts” Thomas was trying to convey, I’m much more critical of his argument.

And that’s the beauty of the Internet, and the blogs. If you here or read something that Rush or Hannity spouts out, and want to check it’s credibility, just grab a computer with a connection and you can. Look at the whole Dan Rather/memogate claptrap. Most of the research was done by bloggers.

We have the power to call out the MSM and their false claims, and say “excuse me, that’s not the truth at all.” And present our case just as good, often times better, than they can.

Power to the people, right on

I didn’t have time earlier to read all of the articles under discussion. I finally got around to it this evening. Here is my fully informed opinion.

Brady, Klein, and McCurry, were all responding to specific situation where each was subject to criticism from liberal blogs. They were defending themselves or lashing out. I don’t think there much more to it than that. The CBS commentary was actually quite balanced as the following passage illustrates.

There would be plenty of people arguing that the kind of discourse happening on many blogs undermines the actual points bloggers and commenters are trying to make. I’m not convinced of that. A strong verbalization of deeply-held feelings can often help make an argument. I might cringe at some of the more nasty things written on some blogs, but the real below-the-belt stuff isn’t as common as some may lead you to believe. The real danger, it seems to me, is a perception of blogs as reactions gauges – a perception that appears to be growing.

The Broder column primary is about touting a couple of white papers by two Washington Think tanks. I wouldn’t get too worked up over his “vituperation” comment. It was a passing remark and let’s face it some of the best commenter here sometimes go over the top with their rhetorical flourishes. He does criticize Kos and Jerome but the criticism are substantive. If he is right in the criticism is open to debate.

The Kos-TNR dust up is the most interesting. I think we are witnessing a power struggle between netroots and the DLC. This may have been triggered by the Lamont/Liebermann battle. The Broder column may also be seen in this light as well, but as I said he makes a rational case which can be debated.

David Brooks is piling on in what is otherwise an intramural battle.

Why no mention of right wing blogs? First that not entirely true. The CBS commentary does link to Michele Malkin. Brady, Klein, and McCurry are responding liberal criticism. Broader is talking about the future of the Democratic party and the Kos-TNR dust up is intramural. David Brooks is David Brooks. Rove has noting to do with this.

That’s it no all encompassing theory. We are just watching the bumping and jostling between the old media and the netroots.

Of course, when you post some brilliant, pithy, right-on-the-money comment, and everybody ignores it, the withdrawl symptoms are just devestating.
— Lance #67

Interesting. Maybe the opposite is true. Maybe the stunned silence is just the mark of appreciation you require.

If you follow threads you see how every comment shapes and resonates down the line, even if it appears to be ignored explicitly.

It’s very character forming.

“If you follow threads you see how every comment shapes and resonates down the line, even if it appears to be ignored explicitly.

It’s very character forming.” – Goldilocks

It’s even better when you follow and comment in a blog for weeks and months and finally start to see your lines of argument being adopted (consciously or unconsciously) by other commentors (or the CB). Like someone recently echoing my prayer to God to bring the Rapture and take Falwell, Robertson and Dobson away 😉

“Maybe the stunned silence is just the mark of appreciation you require.”

Yah, but if I can’t see the stunned looks with mouth agape, what fun is that. This is a blog, for heavens sake!

TCBR helps stretch my mind while also giving me an insight into the extremes of liberal thought. It helps me hone my arguments with people I might even be able to persuade of something rather than bashing my head against the stone wall of my siblings most of whom are Ann Coulter loving conservatives 😉

And as another commentor said (#68, James Dillon) this is the blog I follow on a regular basis and which I most enjoy commenting to.

p.s., re my arch conservative siblings. It was a secret joy, while at my niece’s graduation party, to listen to my nephew, who has joined the Army Reserve as a medic, telling off his father, who is a retired submarine commander, that the dad’s generation ‘blew’ Vietnam. I could see my brother wanting to just reach out a smack the kid. There is nothing like watching conservative disdain become intergenerational 😉

Better late than never. Great stuff here. A few more points:

– What, specifically, do Brooks, Broder, Klein, et. al., dislike? I want dates, sites, names, links. Not just “I don’t like Kos.” Do they dislike Atrios’ attitude and salty tongue? Or specific links to specific articles that he runs?

– Howard Dean was the first to realize that blogs can raise a LOT of money for political candidates. Blogs aren’t just a forum for information and commentary — they’re effective tools in a political campaign. That can scare people.

– Blogs, unlike the MSM, can afford to focus on one issue doggedly (like TPM with Social Security last year) and also HAVE A MEMORY: they can call up old quotes or actions of Cheney’s (or Chris Matthews’) that show them up as hypocrites. The MSM almost never goes back to older stories in its endless search for the next Flavor of the Week.

– Not all MSM commentary is anti-blog. Krugman, for example, has frequently mentioned that the Internet is an important source for his columns.

– Nothing indicates success more than the gaining of adversaries. Just look at how Bill O’Reilly sputters whenever confronted with the latest broadside from David Brock.

– A number of posts here have talked about the freedom of the Internet — but blogs will only remain truly free if there is institutionalized “Net Neutrality.” Unregulated corporate ownership of the Internet may ultimately be the most powerful weapon the anti-bloggers have. Don’t forget to call your Senator.

Exactly what I really meant to say.

The blog phenomenon, speaking as a relative newcomer, is truly phenomenal. It’s riveting, consuming and transforming. I mean, I used to live a normal life. I really don’t know any longer where that’s gone. I’m not complaining, I just wonder where all the time went.

I hadn’t expected this thread to be still running. I read over at FDL in a discussion with Eric Boehlert on his book Lapdogs: How The Press Rolled Over for Bush a comment (#13):

Lack of my commercial rag reader-ship/viewer-ship is hardly important in itself but how many thousands plus have done the same; disgust in the rags led me to progressive blogs which still amaze me daily for their dedication, professionalism and creative approach. (‘rag’ = ‘MSM’)

Instinct tells me this is the paradigm shift.

Comments are closed.