Thursday, 17 December 2009

The Press

“We wuz had!”

Fools or Knaves? Redux Dept
Howard Kurtz:
With all the reporters, sportswriters, paparazzi and celebrity chroniclers chasing after the world's top golfer, how did Tiger Woods keep his extracurricular activities secret for so long?
...
When Woods was driven to the sidelines by the relentless coverage of his tawdry affairs, the multiple mistresses seemed utterly at odds with his squeaky-clean image.  But that image was a carefully crafted construct, since journalists -- and everyone else -- had little access to the player he truly was...
...
Former Washington Post sportswriter Leonard Shapiro writes that he’s
...a little embarrassed that I did not have a clue about Woods’s bizarre double life in what has become one of the most shocking free-falls from grace in the history of sports.
But in a telling admission, Shapiro adds that
...even if I had known about his off-the-course ‘transgressions,’ I’m also not certain what sort of information would have been suitable for publication...
So let’s see: There’s all this stuff going on, but the reporters who were supposed to be on top of things either failed to notice anything happening, or allowed themselves to be steered away.  Or we have reporters who knew what was going on, but chose to keep silent because defying the accepted narrative might not be “suitable.”

And now that the word is out, the press, desperate to preserve what’s left of its credibility, cries “We wuz had!”

Better to be thought a fool than a liar, I guess.


Via Glenn Reynolds, who wonders
How long before we hear “we were all had” about Barack Obama?
Or Anthropogenic Global Warming?

(Hell, I’ve been waiting to hear it about Communism.)

Previously.

Posted by: Old Grouch in The Press at 16:46:03 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 275 words, total size 3 kb.

Friday, 11 December 2009

The Press

I say it’s by design, and I say the hell with it.

Fools or Knaves? Dept
Roberta watches Today:
...It started out as a fairly straightforward report on the sniping between Albert Gore and Sarah Palin over human-caused warming; she’s skeptical while he, as he has droned on and on and on about, in endless and mind-numbing detail, is convinced right down to his marrow that We Is Killing The Earff... Okayfine, good ol’ he said/she said, with interview clips and file footage, quotes from Twitter and Facebook screencaps.

Then it began to morph; we're told The Sarah “never expressed skepticism about climate change during the campaign,” (not, mind you, AGW) and the story proceeds in that vein; suddenly, the “caused by humans” caveat had dropped out of the narrative, replaced by “ain’t the skeptics ignernt.”

I’m not sure if the reporter or producer even realized it; it seems likely that for them, GW = AGW, no questions asked...
Except that his kind of “confusion” always seems to happen when there’s a progressive agenda to advance or a Democrat to protect. (See coverage- or lack thereof- of The Homeless, medical care for illegal aliens, and Whether Or Not 10% Unemployment Is a Good Thing.)

UPDATE, RELATED 091214 01:18CNN reads “Muslim,” says “innocent.”

Posted by: Old Grouch in The Press at 19:17:06 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 211 words, total size 2 kb.

<< Page 1 of 1 >>
71kb generated in CPU 0.02, elapsed 0.12 seconds.
49 queries taking 0.1019 seconds, 182 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.