Media tells stories THEY want to tell to people they don’t respect.
By LisaB on November 17, 2008 at 9:20 PM in Arrogance, Barack Obama, CNN, Chris Matthews, Current Affairs, Gender Bias, Media, Media Bias, Media Handling of Story, Media, Television, Misogyny
I think we make a mistake when we media consumers get angry over poor coverage or bad reporting of people or topics of interest. We assume that those doing the reporting simply don’t understand the topic or dislike the person. Maybe, maybe not. But I do think the media in general exhibit a profound dislike or at least disrespect of its readers and/or viewers. You know, the necessary evil to a reporter.
Rupert Murdoch says big media has only itself to blame for the situation it is in.
With newspapers cutting back and predictions of even worse times ahead, Rupert Murdoch said the profession may still have a bright future if it can shake free of reporters and editors who he said have forfeited the trust and loyalty of their readers.
“My summary of the way some of the established media has responded to the internet is this: it’s not newspapers that might become obsolete. It’s some of the editors, reporters, and proprietors who are forgetting a newspaper’s most precious asset: the bond with its readers,” said Murdoch. . .
Read the rest ->
——————-Murdoch, whose company’s holdings also include MySpace and the Wall Street Journal, criticized what he described as a culture of “complacency and condescension” in some newsrooms.
“The complacency stems from having enjoyed a monopoly–and now finding they have to compete for an audience they once took for granted. The condescension that many show their readers is an even bigger problem. It takes no special genius to point out that if you are contemptuous of your customers, you are going to have a hard time getting them to buy your product. Newspapers are no exception.”
——————–“A recent American study reported that many editors and reporters simply do not trust their readers to make good decisions. Let’s be clear about what this means. This is a polite way of saying that these editors and reporters think their readers are too stupid to think for themselves.”
Of course we’re too stupid. Think not? Well, watch any media person defend “journalism” and you’ll see some version of “we’re really good, but the people, they just don’t understand: our job, how we do our job, what’s really going on, how smart we have to be”, etc. etc. etc. Whenever you have to defend your intelligence because it’s not readily apparent, you’re in trouble.
Then, WaPo notes that many news outlets are offering BO commemorative news products. Is this a problem or just a way to make money?
Perhaps it was the announcement that NBC News is coming out with a DVD titled “Yes We Can: The Barack Obama Story.” Or that ABC and USA Today are rushing out a book on the election. Or that HBO has snapped up a documentary on Obama’s campaign.
Perhaps it was the Newsweek commemorative issue — “Obama’s American Dream” — filled with so many iconic images and such stirring prose that it could have been campaign literature. Or the Time cover depicting Obama as FDR, complete with jaunty cigarette holder.
Are the media capable of merchandizing the moment, packaging a president-elect for profit?Yes, they are.
Seems to me WaPo doesn’t like this too much but just sees it as a tacky way to make a buck. I think it’s a bigger sell-out than that. After all, how do you offer a commemorative package if it has lots of real criticism and real vetting? Commemorative products don’t do that.
Kurtz goes on to list some of the more nauseating media Obama-worship, but unfortunately doesn’t offer much criticism.
Jennifer Rubin, though, has a comment.
The MSM championed Barack Obama throughout the primaries, clubbed his opponent, lauded him during the general election, and is now marveling at his transition. There’s no reason to stop now. If the mainstream media cared about unbiased reporting and exacting investigation, they would have made some effort earlier to balance the coverage. And now that the election of Obama has fulfilled their dreams and aspirations, why should they return to the humdrum tasks of quibbling with the press secretary, investing inter-agency squabbles, and questioning the lack of progress or the outright repudiation of campaign pledges? That might scuff up the President’s image. And it might put them on the outs with their hero.
Really, I think it’s too much to expect that the lapdog media will turn into attack-dogs or watchdogs anytime soon. After all, they have a President to help succeed.
Of course, Rubin is referring to Tweety’s assertion that it is his JOB to help out the Obama administration. Either Tweety is completely revising the definition of journalist or trying to get a running start on a potential Senate/lapdog seat, as has been rumored. If you haven’t already seen this example of high objective journalism in action, I suggest you watch.
Mediamatters has a piece on how the media is covering the rumors of HRC as SOS. Apparently, MSNBC is still bashing HRC whenever it can.
Discussing the possibility of Sen. Hillary Clinton becoming the secretary of state in President-elect Barack Obama’s administration on the November 14 edition of MSNBC’s Hardball, MSNBC political analyst Michelle Bernard asserted: “If she’s secretary of state, she will run a parallel government. It will be a huge problem.” Additionally, Jennifer Donahue, political director of the New Hampshire Institute of Politics, asked: “Will she [Clinton] be laying out the groundwork should Obama have only one term? Will she be, in fact, trying to create only one term for Barack Obama?”
During the program, Bernard also said Clinton “could give him [Obama] some cover, and she could also walk — go around the world acting as if she is not the secretary of state but the United States — the president of the United States. That’s a huge danger for him. It’s a very, very high-level job.” Host Chris Matthews then asked Donahue, “[W]ould you trust her to be a loyal subordinate, or believe she would be a bit too aggressive as a colleague?”
Here’s some wisdom from Tweety and guest “journalists.”
Matthews sounds as if he is defending HRC, but that’s a deliberate ploy to keep the conversation going in the direction he wants. He later accuses HRC of looking at Biden as a roadblock as she tries to accumulate power. The theme of this “story?” How HRC is a power hungry steamroller trying to flatten everyone as she grasps for whatever she can find. Ugh. Journalism? No. Speculation and bad thinking. Standard fare with Tweety.
Mediamatters also has a VERY interesting page noting all the negative HRC statements and media stories saying that she is “out to get” or somehow destroy the Obama wagon. This is worth looking at. MM groups media “stories” into 3 categories, below which are specific examples from tv and print “journalists.”
Examples of media figures suggesting that Clinton would pursue her own agenda as secretary of state and not Obama’s
Examples of media figures referring to Clinton as Obama’s “enem[y]
Examples of media figures suggesting that Clinton might cause trouble for Obama if he does not include her in the administration
Here’s a video compilation of some “news” professionals.
The media obsession with the Clintons continues unabated and they make HRC or BC the story whenever possible.
What’s the takeaway here? Well, Murdoch, I feel, accurately diagnosed the major problem with the MSM. It’s lost the trust of viewers/readers. While journalists try to figure out why this has happened and continue to claim THEY are doing THEIR jobs well, others continue to point, fruitlessly, to video and print where journalists spout “received wisdom” rather than challenge assumptions.
For example, it’s long been the narrative that HRC is a grasping, power-mad, mutant woman who is intrinsically unfit for any trust. “Journalists” start out by faintly praising her experience and quickly move to their BUTS. But she’s a harpy, BUT she’s trying to take over, BUT she’s not a real woman, BUT, BUT, BUT. Then after playing the BUT card in some way, they move on to BC as a reason to distrust Hillary.
WTH? The very fact that the same narrative with respect to HRC plays again and again and again and again makes it sound very much like the “research” for the “story” consists of reading MooDoo or reviewing Chris Matthews’ video. Do ANY of these people challenge their own assumptions? Apparently not.
Given that, am I really surprised that NBC will be peddling a “Yes We Can” DVD? No. The “fourth estate” died from dehydration a while ago. If all they offer is slobbering praise on the one hand, out of control vitriol on the other and still manifest arrogance and condescension, I’m surprised they’ve lasted this long. Because of all their assertions that America will somehow be lessened if big media isn’t accorded respect by those they cover and those who “consume” their “product,” I hope they die out sooner rather than later. It certainly won’t be the end of news or of investigative research and reporting.
Despite being in the business of exposing other people, the media is myopic about itself. The continuing pushback by media personnel to those criticizing their performance certainly suggests they don’t get it at all. Somewhere during the “professionalizing” of journalism, journalists came to believe that they were not only specialists in news gathering but in news understanding. That part was always supposed to be left to the reader/viewer. Not anymore.
Any chance this economic downturn will result in fewer “professional news” outlets?
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
8% Off at $11.95, with a rare five-star ranking by 294 customers: 
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
How bizarre is it that Murdoch is making this argument. Let’s not forget he was a major player in the Clinton-hating games. Maybe he regrets the consequences?
During this campaign, I think the mainstream media has totally given away its hand. The whole kit-n-kaboodle of the mainstream media sources seem to be propagandists….but I am not sure exactly for what….probably One World Government…New World Order…One World Religion.
I don’t consider myself a political extremist, but I don’t see how any open-minded person at this point in time cannot entertain the possibility that longstanding warnings coming from some people considered political extremists actually may have some basis in fact.
Rupert Murdoch is a puzzle. He is identified with right-wing causes but Fox Network tends to have anti-government, conspiracy type programming. I am thinking of shows like X-Files, 24, and the newer programs, Prison Break and Fringe. NBC on the other hand is supposedly more liberal politically, but its parent company, General Electric, is about as globalist, and I would say fascist, as you can get. In UFO circles, GE has the reputation of being of one of the keepers of the secret. People called political extremists have warned for years now that that the culmination of global control efforts will be heralded by the announcement of the existence of alien visitors.
As for Hillary….as Bill Clinton said during the primaries, Hillary (and not Obama) is the anti-establishment candidate. I believe she is and the media will use every excuse available to discredit her. Hopefully, Obama does not think he can use Hillary as a shield or a whipping girl. It won’t work, Barky and Keith and Andrea and Chris. It will not work; it will backfire.
You shouldn’t underestimate the power of $$$$$. They sold us out for cash. No other reason. They don’t want 1 world government. They aren’t trying to usher in armageddon or any other delusional fantasy. They just got their hands on tons of Obama cash. Some more than others. Same thing happened the last 2 elections and the Iraq war sellout. Obama cash was funneled to think tanks or whatever and those think-tanks paid these “newsy’s” to write favorable pieces.
Might also add the group think/herd mentality thing was most likely in play as well. Obamas surrogates pay certain media members to write positive stories and the rest probably just followed along like good little sheeple.
I’ve always heard that Murdoch’s holdings in England are left-wing extremist in viewpoint. Murdoch plays all sides. I think he started Fox and its RW slant simply because he saw a void and moved to fill it. It has been very good to him as Fox is by far the highest rated. Maybe he just gives the public what he thinks they want.
forwarded:
Hi,
I just want to tell you that tonight’s show is on! It will be lively and fun filled, as well as informative.
Please post this on your Blogs, any Blogs you are associated with and send to everyone in your address book, that is still interested in making sure Obama never moves into the Whitehouse! Link, call in number and show times below!
http://www.monksmedia.com
Call In # 317-565-1392
5:00 Pacific Time
6:00 PM Mountain Time
7:00 PM Central Time
8:00 PM Eastern Time
You can listen live by clicking on the Red Listen Live Button on the top left hand side or click on the Live Chat Button in the middle of the page just above MommaE & The Radio Rebels little picture and chat while listening! Hope to see you all there!
MommaE
I am no longer one and have not been since it was clear the fourth estate sold its soul to a nasty demon. I am being metaphorical.
OT. I don’t think this will work but I applaud Berg for trying to uphold the USC. Its page 2 of the PDF link.
Why is that horrible woman, Michelle Bernhard still on TV?
Both Michelle Bernard and Jennifer Donahue seem to have a huge ax to grind against Hillary Clinton. These two dislike Hillary so much that Tweetie of all people feels the need to defend her! The Clinton-hating never stops on MSNBC.
And I noticed on cnn.com the lead story says that donors to Bill’s foundation will be a huge problem for Hillary’s confirmation as Secretary of State. When can we expect someone, anyone, to please investigate Obama’s donors?
Everyday I am so thankful I never connected my cable when I moved to Encinitas three years ago. No television whatsoever for me. And I did think it might be safe to go back to cnn.com now that the election is over, but I guess not.
Holy cow, those women were NUTS!!! They could barely contain themselves abt how WONDERFUL Obama is, thinking so much farther ahead than anyone else. I mean, you KNOW it is bad when Chris Matthews looks like the neutral one!
Rupert Murdoch is right. The problem with newspapers, television news and reporters is that they are consumed by their own self importance. I am amazed at how little they know about our Constitution or about the role of a free press in a democracy. They also apparently do not know about the history of our nation or of even the history of any other nation. They just read what some public relations person has written for them.
The so called traditional free press died with the late Katharine Graham who was publisher of the Washington Post. Citizen journalists are the ones keeping us informed and trying to hold our democracy together.
You do understand that Rupert Murdoch OWNS most of the media in the U. S. (even though he is Austrailian), don’t you?
‘most’ indicates greater than 50%. It is patently untrue to say Murdoch owns anywhere close to 50% of the media in the U.S., which includes all radio stations, TV broadcasters and cable networks, newspapers, magazines, and internet sites.
In this quote, he is criticizing newspapers, which is something he knows a good deal about. However, in contrast to your assertion, as of 2007 Murdoch’s U.S. newspaper holdings now only includes the Post and community papers in Brooklyn and Queens.
Recall the photo from a few months back where Obama was carrying the book “Post-America World”? Out of curiosity, I just finished that book. It is very telling. The book near the beginning talks about how relatively “small” the economy of Iran is compared to our own… something like 1/68 and uses that comparison to help downplay the risks of Muslim extremism. The book speaks about the “rise of the rest” and a relative and inevitable decline of the US as a world power. Though, the book does have many valid points, it is clear where Obama got his “Iran is a tiny country” and “they are no threat” motivations… although, I suspect Obama just latched onto the parts of the book that reinforced his own diminished views of America. Troubling also, is how this highly “educated” man could take any single book as absolute truth… even apparently using it in campaign speeches. Most troubling is that this country has just elected the leader of the “blame America first” as our next President. The damage that could occur to this nation and in fact the world in the next years is untold.
ugh, they are so nauseating to listen to.
No kidding, Sara. I am working up the being able to listen to them now. Blech.
Great post, LisaB!
I stopped listening to the network news, unless local reporting, and reading newspapers years ago. I knew something was up when they kept slamming Pres. Clinton and the Ken Starr news, which they over-reported. I knew they were out to forever bury the Clintons. They they crammed the Iraq War and GWB down our throats, just like they are cramming BHO down our throats. They are no longer impartial reporters—they have an agenda, the agenda of the mega-corporations that run them, and the profit motive that drives them.
It took almost a billion dollars, but they bought the country. Little donors, sure.
I didn’t realize when Mathews said, “I’m going to do everything I can to make sure this presidency is a success”, meant he intended to pick cabinet appointees. I heard him say (a lifetime ago when I still watched MSNBC) the public wouldn’t understand the issues. He has no respect for the intelligence of the American people. He has been in Washington too long. What a buffoon.
A Giddy Sense of Boosterism
By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, November 17, 2008; C01
Perhaps it was the announcement that NBC News is coming out with a DVD titled “Yes We Can: The Barack Obama Story.” Or that ABC and USA Today are rushing out a book on the election. Or that HBO has snapped up a documentary on Obama’s campaign.
Perhaps it was the Newsweek commemorative issue — “Obama’s American Dream” — filled with so many iconic images and such stirring prose that it could have been campaign literature. Or the Time cover depicting Obama as FDR, complete with jaunty cigarette holder.
Are the media capable of merchandizing the moment, packaging a president-elect for profit? Yes, they are.
What’s troubling here goes beyond the clanging of cash registers. Media outlets have always tried to make a few bucks off the next big thing. The endless campaign is over, and there’s nothing wrong with the country pulling together, however briefly, behind its new leader. But we seem to have crossed a cultural line into mythmaking.
“The Obamas’ New Life!” blares People’s cover, with a shot of the family. “New home, new friends, new puppy!” Us Weekly goes with a Barack quote: “I Think I’m a Pretty Cool Dad.” The Chicago Tribune trumpets that Michelle “is poised to be the new Oprah and the next Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis — combined!” for the fashion world.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/16/AR2008111602374_pf.html
It’s great to see that this ad appeared in MSM!
***
(pasted from above)
This full-page ad appeared today in the Washington Times National Weekly (Monday November 17 edition) It will hit subscribers’ mailboxes on Tuesday.
We have to do more than complain to each other on the blogs! What force, power can we exert to expose the lies, innuendo, snark, garbage that’s polluting fair reality-based discourse on important matters? It’s not enough to preach to the choir. We should form local picketing groups in front of NBC affiliates. We should publish a list of Matthews crap to be played over and over again in a loop as he tries to run for election. We should expose these people for the haters they are. And we need one shining example of true journalism that people can turn to. There’d be money in it for someone. Now is the time to expose, and revolt! I’d love there to be one night of revolution, when fair minded guests on all of these shows turn on their hosts and expose them for their bias. We must take back the “airwaves.”
Did you guys see this site and video clip? It is based on an upcoming video.
http://www.howobamagotelected.com/
Thanks for the link. Looking forward to the video!
Time-Warner, Viacom, GE and the other corporations that own the media(don’t forget pop culture figures like Oprah, Hollywood types,etc) have promoted BO from the beginning, he was their man to stick it to the last 8 years of Bush. They understand that he is just the other side of the same coin as Bush with an added bonus-he’s a minority and with the political correctness of the last 20 years no one would dare make jokes about him or put him up to ridicule or investigation. He will give them what they want, basically a fascist government where they are in charge. He is a puppet like Bush except for the other side. No negative story will get through this iron curtain of American press but the ubiquitous images of BO will start to grate on American’s nerves–we essentially don’t like overkill and it will start to backfire.
BO’s criminal Acorn connections, his credit card fraud in his campaign financing, his Rezko and Ayers and Wright friendships are all still there–they’re not going anywhere and eventually when the United States of Distraction becomes just the USA again after a backlash of media saturation all of this will come out. Unfortunately, the media has a huge interest in shutting down investigations of BO so it could be some time. The fact that there are tens of millions who aren’t buying their crap can’t be held back forever. Can’t wait.
I wish Murdoch went further and dived in to the fact that the media joined forces to push Obama, I believe every effort and deplorable act, to have him be their puppet, for a couple of reasons. One, definitely being to show they still had some power, and then the second, when it’s time to call in their favor to Obama for helping give him the presidency, that the “Free Internet” that they despise so much, WON’T BE SO FREE ANYMORE. He placed the first stone on that path with his FISA reversal.
If there is at least one silver lining to Hillary being SOS to highlight, that the media who many of them are still choking on that prospect, will now have to concede the power Secretary of State Hillary will have.
I cannot believe that you would be quoting Rupert Murdoch!!! Rupert Murdoch is George Soros’ evil Id. Murdoch brought us George W. Bush.
Evil id?….I’m dying, just dying…love it. Thanks.
I Agree.
tek…..who cares who is quoted. Is the remark relevant or not?
Of course it is.
Disturbing video:
If the embed doesn’t work, paste the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm1KOBMg1Y8
Rupert Murdoch has al sorts of views -but he DOES know media very well.
Check this out. We are a nation of dunces. And, that is how we got Obama as our President-elect. How did this happen?
MEDIA MALPRACTICE
http://www.howobamagotelected.com/
Lisa, great article here. Thanks.
What’s particularly frightening is how ill-informed these media reports are. Their number one job is to inform the public. Yet, there is absolutely no coverage of the facts about Hillary, which I’m sure Obama knew better than any of us, even.
One, she had overwhelming support from the armed forces. She was the candidate with all the military endorsements, not Obama. The military doesn’t trust HIM. THAT is his problem, and he knows it.
Two, she ran circles around him as far as knowledge and depth of foreign affairs. His poor debate performance was similar to Sarah Palin’s blown interviews. It was due to lack of depth. Once he got past his 3 talking points, he was lost. It showed to anyone with half a brain.
Three, she has senate experience that is invaluable to this position, having been on the foreign policy committee.
Continuing here…
When I see the media doing nothing but repeating old saws about “Keep your enemies close,” but failing to give relevant facts, then I know that these political commentators really do not know what they are talking about 90% of the time.
And what is wrong about this brand of yellow journalism is that they are, in fact, misinforming the public. It’s more than just being partisan. It’s dangerously irresponsible.
Murdoch is not hitting the worst of this problem, naturally. I’m not sure these people are, in fact, capable of thinking outside of their Rovian perspective. They do nothing but question motives, which Chris Matthews, oddly enough, is the only one who recognizes that’s false to imagine one can deduce that anyway! It’s blogger blather, in short. It’s the type of thinking that does nothing to put forth discourse in an intelligent, rational way and merely shows the personal prejudices of the person speaking.
This story irritates me, but it’s not highly relevant in the big picture of what we’re facing.
But imagine the lack of real information when it comes to issues such as the bail-outs, or oil, or nuclear power plants, or the economy?
Until we see a media that does its real homework, gives all the facts (even those that don’t please them), then we are living with an irreponsible and dangerous media.
My deeper question? Where in the world are the truly educated and intelligent people who know full well that this type of information is highly irresponsible. Why is this being allowed to continue?
My own theory I stated yesterday. There simply aren’t truly enough media personalities that also are trained journalists. There is a dearth of talent, in short.
It’s always been the print journalists who had the brains. Unfortunately, the media personality style isn’t even reading the print media enough to broaden their own remarks. Lazy.