Another friend sent a giggle with the HBO press release on Spike Lee's forthcoming Katrina documentary. Is Spike Lee seeking a "wide range of opinions"? Bayou Buzz has details, including this piece of the press release:
The line between old-fashioned objective reporting and opinion writing is blurry enough on the big subjects like the war on terrorism and the economy, but in entertainment journalism, it’s becoming nearly impossible to differentiate between the two, especially since those who deliver this product don’t, and won’t.
Right On has an analysis of the poll.
The latest poll from the AP tells us that “Most Americans Plan to Vote for Democrats”. According to the poll, registered voters are tired of a Republican Congress and are willing to reverse control by a margin of 3 to 1.
Most NBers are likely unfamiliar with the name Eric Boehlert. He is a contributing editor for Rolling Stone magazine that used to write for Salon, and has a book out called “Lapdogs: How the Press Rolled Over For Bush.” In it, he accused the media of actually having a pro-Bush bias in a book that the Washington Post’s Book World comically declared was “written as though a cadre of Bill Clinton's defenders were its editors.”
Well, Boehlert is at it again, this time claiming at Huffington Post that “the Arab-Israeli conflict is told in the United States mostly through the eyes of Israelis, and that's especially true on cable news channels.”
Boehlert’s angst stemmed from watching CNN on Thursday after reading a Reuters article about 53 Lebanese civilians being killed in an Israeli attack, “a fact that struck [him] as central to the unfolding story” in the Middle East:
A colleague forwarded a press release from MTV titled "MTV News Presents: Iraq Uploaded To Air Friday, July 21st at 8PM (ET/PT)." The special will show how soldiers "document war" in Iraq and share it on the Web, but watch out for that "mujahideen" perspective:
Time magazine has hired another liberal blogger in its ongoing effort to make the balance of its conservative vs. liberal bloggers as balanced as its news reporting. Not only that, their new blogger is a fan of Bush conspiracy theories.
AllahPundit writes at Hot Air:
This makes three bloggers writing for Time now: Marshall, Wonkette, and of course St. Andrew.
St. Andrew being the “conservative.”
Historical revisionism…describes the process that attempts to rewrite history by downgrading, denying or simply ignoring essential facts.
Somebody please tell me what is funny or - more importantly - true about this cartoon.
Is this really the view of Dan Wasserman and by extension the paper that employs him - the Boston Globe? Do Wasserman and the Globe really believe that, in his heart, President George W. Bush is a torture-master of medieval proportions? Do they truly think that only international agreements and court decisions stand between him and the barbarous flaying of prisoners?
The cartoon is presumably referencing a recent Supreme Court decision that ruled against the administration's use of military tribunals for the trial of Gitmo detainees.
A Friday editorial, "Chained to the Ballot," applauds a U.S. District judge for keeping former House majority leader Tom DeLay on the ballot for the upcoming congressional election, calling DeLay’s failed attempt (he will appeal the ruling) a "gambit" and "final power play," as well as "bait-and-switch politicking."
- The Tribune Company lost 62 percent of their earnings.
- McClatchy kept earnings about the same though they lost almost 5 percent of their circulation.
- Media General lost 47 percent from a year ago.
- Gannett lost 8.3 percent.
Of course, none of the papers will admit that their bias and reportage are to blame for their problems. Instead it is all the fault of Internet activities, Craigslist, the uncooperative entertainment and auto industry, and a "weak operating environment." Leave it to journalists to blame even thier financial problems on the environment.
I would highly suggest any newspaper publishers wanting to save their papers take a tip from my recent Newsbusters post on the real problem.
Israel might be defending itself on two fronts this morning, but that might not be enough. The Today show was attacking on at least three. And in a brief-but-telling moment, Andrea Mitchell gave away the blame-Israel game with a spontaneous shake of the head.
Here's the gist of Today's reporting:
- Israel's offensive against Hezbollah is based on a 'pretext.'
- The Bush administration has dropped the diplomatic ball. It should have sent higher-level people in to mediate sooner. In the meantime, despite the concerns of America's European allies, the Bush White House has given Israel a dangerous 'green light' to attack.
- The Bush administration is not responding effectively to the crisis because it is 'overwhelmed' and spread too thin by involvement elsewhere.
- With ghoulish glee, Today wasted no time speculating on the possibility of $100/barrel oil resulting from the heightened tensions.
The latest e-mail from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is signed by Rep. John Murtha, in which he repeats the Karl-Rove-air-conditioned-fat-backside line he used on the Olbermann hootenanny on MSNBC. (Maybe that works with liberals, but ahem, isn't Murtha's backside fatter than Rove's?) Rest assured, this lame appeal to put the Democrats back in the majority won't have Rove in a murderous dither:
In March 2004, when the Bush campaign ran ads showing a brief image of a flag-draped body being removed from the World Trade Center wreckage, the media played up charges by Bush critics that the President was exploiting 9/11 for political purposes. When Republicans recently criticized Democrats for an ad that included images of flag-draped coffins of U.S.
No doubt you've seen countless examples of newspapers pining for open government, sunshine laws and freedom of access to court documents. That's fine when you're a journalist chasing evil corporations and big government, but as we all know journalists don't play by the same rules as the rest of us.
The Missoulian was caught cheating their carriers out of money rightfully owed. No one doubts that -- they have settled in the class action lawsuit. But don't bother asking by how much they cheated their own employees, the enforcers of transparency won't talk about it. One might then ask a carrier, but the terms of the settlement are confidential. A good reporter would then turn to the court documents but the newspaper "also took the unusual step of requesting that the entire court file be sealed, which request the court granted."
How can we know if the carriers are making "a living wage?"