For John, BLUF: You need a diversity of news sources. Nothing to see here; just move along.
Law Professor Glenn Harlan Reynolds, writing in USA Today, says "When newsrooms run with stories too good to be true, they should diversify their ranks."
"So, basically, my butt refuted The New York Times."Then Professor Reynolds moves on to Rolling Stone and then Bloomberg.That's what I heard in the press room at this weekend's NRA convention in Nashville, from gun-blogger SayUncle (real name: Chance Ballew).
The Times had editorialized that the NRA was a bunch of hypocrites because although attendees with gun permits were allowed to carry guns on the convention floor, those guns were actually neutered by having the firing pins removed: "Seventy-thousand people are expected to attend the National Rifle Association's convention opening (last Friday) in Tennessee, and not one of them will be allowed to come armed with guns that can actually shoot. After all the NRA propaganda about how 'good guys with guns' are needed to be on guard across American life, from elementary schools to workplaces, the weekend's gathering of disarmed conventioneers seems the ultimate in hypocrisy."
A damning assertion of hypocrisy — except that it wasn't even close to true. The only guns with firing pins removed were the display guns on the convention floor. In fact, several gun bloggers tweeted a photo of themselves carrying fully functional firearms from the press room, forcing The Times into an embarrassing — though still incomplete — correction. It was especially embarrassing because a simple check of the NRA website or The Tennessean would have revealed the truth. But The Times' editors saw a chance to score a cheap shot and got carried away in their excitement. (MSNBC got burned, too.)
And then he wraps it up:
Even so, I don't think that big news outlets such as The Times, Bloomberg or Rolling Stone will start hiring people with different backgrounds and political views. Instead, I think they'll simply lose audiences, and trust, to people who do. In the marketplace of ideas, you can only go so far when you're one-sided. Though these humiliations should be a wake-up call, I expect them to keep snoozing.I can't really take seriously critical comments about Fox News with this kind of thing going on.
Hat tip to the Instapundit.
Regards — Cliff
PS: I don't actually get the "butt refuted" thing.
10 comments:
This shows how bad things are at the NYT: the first trigger for the review process indicating something was wrong with the article was that it portrayed the NRA as showing some sanity and not just being a bunch of gun nuts.
Really? Because the NYT is biased, you will relax your concern that Fox News is biased, too?
This kind of nonsense is why I am terrified of adherents of both major political parties and consider them all equally and dangerously stupid and ignorant--NYT lovers everywhere are justifying their blind belief in whatever is printed there, "safe" in their concomitant belief they must be right because Fox News was the one who broke the story.
Stupid and ignorant.
Well, the NYT is our "Paper of Record" and "we all know" that Fox is biased and wrong. I am in a discussion in another forum with a chap who says we should believe CBS and SPLC and not believe Fox and other "right wing" outlets. Yes, I want to hold The Old Grey Lady to a higher standard. A standard they claim for themselves, and the Left claims for them.
Me, I read Nation of Change and Catholic Worker for balance.
Regards — Cliff
Lefty yahoos who swallow any sort of BS as long as it's disbelieved by Breitbart are of the identical race of morons. But I'll repeat the assertion: Crediting Fox and denying valid criticsm thereof because the NYT has become a journalistic train wreck is profoundly stupid and ignorant.
I am not so sure I am crediting Fox so much as saying let us not be dumping on Fox when the others are little better. When people are saying al Jazeera is a good news source you know that there is a problem out there.
Regards — Cliff
Denying valid criticsm of Fox News because the NYT has become a journalistic train wreck is profoundly stupid and ignorant.
Do you really want to live in a world where we excuse journalistic villiany for any reason whatsoever? Your bias and your willful refusal to insist upon reason is ugly, and a large portion of the reason liberal excess is indulged in return.
A pox on both your houses.
I think you are missing the point. I find problems with Fox News. For instance, I don't watch Hannity. Others I take with a grain of salt. And, if I watch any news more than any other, it is NECN. I subscribe to The Globe and The Sun and have an online subscription to the NYT and buy the Sunday edition at the 38 Store. I have a subscription to the (left wing) New Yorker and to The New York Review of Books. And The Catholic Worker. And other sources. What more can I do?
What offends me is the idea that CBS, NBC, ABC, etc are venues of virtue and Fox is a biased pit of ignorance and stupidity. Fox has its defects. I don't deny that. On the other hand, I don't boycott it.
And, I suspect the "Declines to State" crowd fosters this ignorant view that Fox is evil, but others are saintly. That understanding can lead us astray as a Democracy. Especially when potential voters think that have found ground truth and others are too ignorant to be allowed near the ballot box.
Regards — Cliff
The recipe for exactly the situation you decry: "What offends me is the idea that Breitbart, Fox News, etc. are venues of virtue and CBS, NBC, ABC, etc are biased pits of ignorance and stupidity. The NYT has its defects. I don't deny that. On the other hand, I don't boycott it".
Et voila, instant readership.
A pox on both your houses.
Or, put another way: While you and your ideological doppelgangers are all busy genuflecting to your Medusa's head of dueling right and left fonts of fantasy, the truth remains untold.
Demanding better starts with refusing to give credence to anyone who will publish nonsense on the flimsy rationale that at least not all of what they publish is nonsense.
Perhaps I have not been sufficiently clear. I believe Fox News has defects; sometimes bad, sometimes outrageous, reporting. What I don't like is hearing folks condemn Fox News while trumpeting the virtues of the other networks, or SPLC, as I run into quite frequently. (Perhaps I associate with the wrong people.) Heck, I read today where Roger Ailes would rehire Brian Williams.
I am asking for a level playing field and a First Amendment.
Regards — Cliff
Post a Comment