Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How the media blew it - a look back....

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
newamericanpatriot Donating Member (95 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-09-08 09:54 AM
Original message
How the media blew it - a look back....
from
http://aliberaldose.blogspot.com/2006/03/how-media-blew-it.html

As we enter our third year in Iraq with civilian deaths spiraling out of control, essential services like water, sewage and electricity intermittent, and hundreds of thousands of civilians -- up to a staggering 90 percent who are KNOWN TO BE INNOCENT -- being held in our gulags, the cakewalk is far, far from over, and in fact may just be about to ignite an explosive regional war that threatens to engulf the entire Middle East.

And while the poster child of journalistic integrity Judith Miller may have led the pack in breathlessly trumpeting reckless assertions without being arsed to conduct even the most basic of fact-checking, the truth is most of the major media outlets were all too happy to regurgitate the talking points spoon-fed to them by the Red House.

Whether cowed by the (admittedly frightening face of) that wizened old monopolist Rupert Murdoch or latter-day carpetbagger and opportunist Conrad Black, or simply too goddamned lazy to follow up, newspaper after radio station after television network led us handily down the garden path to the frightening game of global brinkmanship in which we find ourselves today.

To give some sort of perspective on just how outrageously wrong the whole press corps were on National Chimp-in-Chief Photo Op Accomplished Day, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting has compiled a little refresher for us. Here's hoping our media watchdogs won't be so gullible next time the Red House decides to move some product.

"Iraq Is All but Won; Now What?" (Los Angeles Times headline, 4/10/03)

"Now that the combat phase of the war in Iraq is officially over, what begins is a debate throughout the entire U.S. government over America's unrivaled power and how best to use it." (CBS reporter Joie Chen, 5/4/03)

"Congress returns to Washington this week to a world very different from the one members left two weeks ago. The war in Iraq is essentially over and domestic issues are regaining attention." (NPR's Bob Edwards, 4/28/03)

"Tommy Franks and the coalition forces have demonstrated the old axiom that boldness on the battlefield produces swift and relatively bloodless victory. The three-week swing through Iraq has utterly shattered skeptics' complaints." (Fox News Channel's Tony Snow, 4/27/03)

"The only people who think this wasn't a victory are Upper Westside liberals, and a few people here in Washington." (Charles Krauthammer, Inside Washington, WUSA-TV, 4/19/03)

"We had controversial wars that divided the country. This war united the country and brought the military back." (Newsweek's Howard Fineman--MSNBC, 5/7/03)

"We're all neo-cons now." (MSNBC's Chris Matthews, 4/9/03)

"The war was the hard part. The hard part was putting together a coalition, getting 300,000 troops over there and all their equipment and winning. And it gets easier. I mean, setting up a democracy is hard, but it is not as hard as winning a war." (Fox News Channel's Fred Barnes, 4/10/03)

"Oh, it was breathtaking. I mean I was almost starting to think that we had become inured to everything that we'd seen of this war over the past three weeks; all this sort of saturation. And finally, when we saw that it was such a just true, genuine expression. It was reminiscent, I think, of the fall of the Berlin Wall. And just sort of that pure emotional expression, not choreographed, not stage-managed, the way so many things these days seem to be. Really breathtaking." - Washington Post reporter Ceci Connolly, appearing on Fox News Channel on 4/9/03, discussing the pulling down of a Saddam Hussein statue in Baghdad, an event later revealed to have been a U.S. military PSYOPS operation.

"The war winds down, politics heats up.... Picture perfect. Part Spider-Man, part Tom Cruise, part Ronald Reagan. The president seizes the moment on an aircraft carrier in the Pacific." (PBS's Gwen Ifill, 5/2/03, on George W. Bush's "Mission Accomplished" speech)

"We're proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger, who's physical, who's not a complicated guy like Clinton or even like Dukakis or Mondale, all those guys, McGovern. They want a guy who's president. Women like a guy who's president. Check it out. The women like this war. I think we like having a hero as our president. It's simple. We're not like the Brits." (MSNBC's Chris Matthews, 5/1/03)

"He looked like an alternatively commander in chief, rock star, movie star, and one of the guys." (CNN's Lou Dobbs, on Bush's 'Mission Accomplished' speech, 5/1/03)

"Why don't the damn Democrats give the president his day? He won today. He did well today." (MSNBC's Chris Matthews, 4/9/03)

"If image is everything, how can the Democratic presidential hopefuls compete with a president fresh from a war victory?" (CNN's Judy Woodruff, 5/5/03)

"I doubt that the journalists at the New York Times and NPR or at ABC or at CNN are going to ever admit just how wrong their negative pronouncements were over the past four weeks." (MSNBC's Joe Scarborough, 4/9/03)

"This has been a tough war for commentators on the American left. To hope for defeat meant cheering for Saddam Hussein. To hope for victory meant cheering for President Bush. The toppling of Mr. Hussein, or at least a statue of him, has made their arguments even harder to defend. Liberal writers for ideologically driven magazines like The Nation and for less overtly political ones like The New Yorker did not predict a defeat, but the terrible consequences many warned of have not happened. Now liberal commentators must address the victory at hand and confront an ascendant conservative juggernaut that asserts United States might can set the world right." (New York Times reporter David Carr, 4/16/03)

"This will be no war -- there will be a fairly brief and ruthless military intervention.... The president will give an order. will be rapid, accurate and dazzling.... It will be greeted by the majority of the Iraqi people as an emancipation. And I say, bring it on." (Christopher Hitchens, in a 1/28/03 debate-- cited in the Observer, 3/30/03)

"I will bet you the best dinner in the gaslight district of San Diego that military action will not last more than a week. Are you willing to take that wager?" (Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly, 1/29/03)

"It won't take weeks. You know that, professor. Our military machine will crush Iraq in a matter of days and there's no question that it will." (Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly, 2/10/03)

One might almost be inclined to speculate that the Bush cabal had hired their own personal media whores, but then, that would be absurd, wouldn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-09-08 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
1. From 2000-2007, Bush was most media-protected candidate/president in history. Far more so than
Edited on Mon Jun-09-08 10:20 AM by blm
even Ronnie Reagan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janet118 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-09-08 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. Wait for McCain's free ride . . .
He says the most crazy, outrageous, and downright stupid things and the media says, "No big deal." A Democrat says one badly worded thing and its the Big Topic of the Day.

Do you think that a Democrat could have given that hideous speech McCain gave last Tuesday night and not have had its most embarrassing moments (and there were many) looped over and over again on the cable shows? Me neither. I rarely saw any clips of the speech on television, with the notable exception of The Daily Show.

Yet, I'm sure that the media will cover every attack from right wing 527s that disparages Obama and dismiss those that bash McCain. Our job is to be there to defend Obama and make every anti-McCain video go viral.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cyr330 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-09-08 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Absolutely
Just like with Bush. . . He managed to not shit in his pants in the debates in 2004, and the press treated him as if he'd actually won the fucking debate by a landslide. . . I'm beginning to LOATHE the press.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greenman3610 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-09-08 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
2. in a democracy, we need a free press
but the last 20 years have led me to hate journalists.
they have betrayed us as a group.

I told our local group of anti war activists in 2003 that the
press was not going to give us any support - anything
true that got out would have to be what we put in the paper,
either as a letter or an advertisement. all else would be
propaganda bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pansypoo53219 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-09-08 11:24 AM
Response to Original message
3. the gnews are as guilty as Bush
because they created him. they deified him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-09-08 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. They were doing the job their masters were paying for - fully complicit.
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC