Journolist, Day 5: Let’s campaign for Obama!
posted at 11:36 am on July 26, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
The Daily Caller offers another installment of its Journolist exposé, only this one may be most notable for the praise given … Sarah Palin. After her speech at the Republican convention in 2008, the list members admitted their respect for the VP nominee, with one calling the speech “gangbusters.” Palin had them worried enough that a proposal floated among members to use the listserv explicitly to coordinate efforts to get Barack Obama elected:
Sarah Palin’s speech to the 2008 Republican convention impressed more than a few doubters, including even some members of Journolist, an online community for liberal journalists.
“This speech is gangbusters,” wrote Ari Melber of the Nation. “Her tone is pitch perfect.” Adele Stan of the Media Consortium agreed: “Palin is golden.”
The exuberance appeared to unnerve the Guardian’s Michael Tomasky. “People get a hold of yourselves!” Tomasky wrote to his fellow Journolisters. “It’s a very good speech with good lines. But there’s very little substance.”
A few days later, the bargaining began:
Luke Mitchell, then a senior editor at Harper’s magazine, asked Tomasky if his paper would be able to help: “Michael – Isn’t this something that can be fanned a bit by, say, the Guardian?”
Tomasky didn’t think it would work. “The Guardian? You’re kidding right? Remember the Clark County letters?” he wrote, referring to a failed attempt by the Guardian to elect John Kerry in 2004 by asking Britons to write letters to voters in a pivotal Ohio county.
Mitchell replied: “Fair enough! But it seems to me that a concerted effort on the part of the left partisan press could be useful. Why geld ourselves? A lot of the people on this list work for organizations that are far more influential than, say, the Washington Times.
“Open question: Would it be a good use of this list to co-ordinate a message of the week along the lines of the GOP? Or is that too loathsome? It certainly sounds loathsome. But so does losing!”
To his credit, Journolist founder Ezra Klein squelched the idea:
“Nope, no message coordination. I’m not even sure that would be legal. This is a discussion list, though, and I want it to retain that character,” he wrote.
But that wasn’t the end of it, according to the Daily Caller’s Jonathan Strong. Ed Kilgore of the Progressive Policy Institute and Todd Gitlin of the Columbia School of Journalism continued to push for better messaging against John McCain and Palin. Gitlin made it specific:
“On the question of liberals coordinating, what the hell’s wrong with some critical mass of liberal bloggers & journalists saying the following among themselves:
“McCain lies about his maverick status. Routinely, cavalierly, cynically. Palin lies about her maverick status. Ditto, ditto, ditto. McCain has a wretched temperament. McCain is a warmonger. Palin belongs to a crackpot church and feels warmly about a crackpot party that trashes America.
“Repeat after me:
“McCain lies about his maverick status. Routinely, cavalierly, cynically. Palin lies about her maverick status. Ditto, ditto, ditto. McCain has a wretched temperament. McCain is a warmonger. Palin belongs to a crackpot church and feels warmly about a crackpot party that trashes America.["]
The Columbia School of Journalism should be answering that question today. What’s wrong with journalists colluding to force a political message through their reporting? Obviously Gitlin doesn’t find anything wrong with it, but perhaps the university’s ethics professors might have a bone to pick with it.
There is little doubt that Journolisters used the listserv for cheerleading and campaigning. In most cases, that would be as surprising as hearing that journalists talk politics at bars, and worthy of the same level of outrage. It’s certainly telling, however, that a man tasked with instructing future journalists has no trouble urging writers to secretly coordinate messages on behalf of the party and candidate he likes. I doubt that’s the first time Gitlin has offered that advice, and Columbia needs to respond to this revelation. Will they stand behind this as proper ethics for their students, or will they repudiate Gitlin?
Update: And don’t miss the initial Journolister foray into Sarah Palin’s uterus, although to be fair, a number of participants insisted that it was really none of their business.
Update II: John Ziegler claims vindication.
Update III: Greg Sargent claims that Ezra’s reply makes this a non-story, and that the Daily Caller is pandering to conservative media. I note that Greg (who was a member of Journolist) doesn’t address the issue of Gitlin expressly demanding coordination later in the thread or the ethics of a J-school professor saying, “Again. And again. Vary the details. There are plenty. Somebody on the ‘list posted a strong list of McCain lies earlier today. Hammer it. Philosophize, as Nietzsche said, with a hammer. I don’t know about any of you, but I’m not waiting for any coordination. Get on with it!”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Trig Truthers on the JournoList, what a surprise. (not!)
Crazy Andy will be thrilled that he has so many fellow travelers.
VidOmnia on July 26, 2010 at 11:40 AM
So the media is exposed as biased. Exposed from the inside. It is great to see the truth leak out.
seven on July 26, 2010 at 11:41 AM
She may be the US version of the Iron Maiden. Needs to get some snapshots with her and Maggie.
lm10001 on July 26, 2010 at 11:41 AM
I blame Bush and Rethuglikkkans.
Good Lt on July 26, 2010 at 11:42 AM
Ah yes,I do remember the “Angry McCain” hit job!!
canopfor on July 26, 2010 at 11:43 AM
Ezra Klein was on Morning Joe this morning….and not even one question about Jornolist.
aquaviva on July 26, 2010 at 11:43 AM
As Rush says, “Liberals will tell you who they fear.”
jimmy2shoes on July 26, 2010 at 11:44 AM
I was glad to see that, but still surprised at how many either took it seriously and/or said what a great story it would be if true. Disturbing.
Slublog on July 26, 2010 at 11:44 AM
Good on you Ed; this story needs to be told…
BTW: Do you know what’s the current status with Anita M. and her suit against Obama?
Keemo on July 26, 2010 at 11:44 AM
1-2-3…Waiting for the usual – It’s her fault – she couldn’t name a single newspaper she read.
katiejane on July 26, 2010 at 11:45 AM
This is all more fuel for the fire and I think we’ve seen enough to call it what it is … a left wing propaganda conspiracy.
Who cares if you call it “discussion” or “coordination”? I mean, we clearly see here that the vocal guys were selling ideas and throwing them out there, even suggesting that they picked up and pushed forward by other so-called journalists.
How many “journalist” who were members of the list, actually took those ideas and pushed them forward like good little soldiers? Even though they may not have uttered a word on the list itself – they took those ideas and put them into their stories to create a loud MANTRA in the media that benefited Obama. I think there is ample evidence of this.
For instance, we saw the other day the suggestion that Palin was a “bad mother” for leaving a special needs child and going on a national campaign. I, for one, remember when the MSM actually pushed this forward as an argument. There’s enough evidence here to suggest that Journolist was media conspiracy.
And for even those “reporters” not on the list – the list served as a “snowball” or bandwagon. When a few members of the list hit on a line of argument – other leftist reporters (who may not have been on the list) joined the bandwagon!
This profession is dead.
HondaV65 on July 26, 2010 at 11:46 AM
Kathleen Parker: But…but…those are just liberals having liberal discussions with their liberal friends about liberal things…uh…nothing to see here. Leave Journolist alone!!!
Bee on July 26, 2010 at 11:48 AM
They just didn’t want to risk the potential backlash – but if some muckracker could find solid proof they’d have been more than happy to use it to push the “she lied & she wasn’t vetted properly” mantra.
katiejane on July 26, 2010 at 11:48 AM
So this crap really is taught in J school…Who knew?
d1carter on July 26, 2010 at 11:48 AM
Sounds more like Barack Hussein 0bama to me.
Anyway, what the he!! business does the Progressive Policy Institute have posting to a blog open only to journalists?
UltimateBob on July 26, 2010 at 11:49 AM
Journolist Embeddedation!!!!!!!!!!
canopfor on July 26, 2010 at 11:49 AM
.
…. perhaps because journalists do possess neither sufficient education nor sufficient wit to assume the reigns of national or cultural leadership: see Krugman, Dowd, Blow, d’Olbermann, …..
.
… or is the quote actually oblique? There are, after all, a quote of a Briton and a reference to Columbia J-School, home of fabulists and plaigarists.
Arbalest on July 26, 2010 at 11:50 AM
I wonder to what extent coordinated messages could be called in-kind contributions to the Obama campaign. Has anybody talked to the FEC?
SWLiP on July 26, 2010 at 11:50 AM
Perhaps they will refudiate him instead.
kgs_mvs on July 26, 2010 at 11:51 AM
Well, the number of known members keeps increasing. Someone should have the list of listers updated fairly soon.
notropis on July 26, 2010 at 11:51 AM
I can’t believe that Klein said, “It may not even be legal.”
LOL*
He’s just so young, eh?
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 11:51 AM
loathsome: adjective
So objectionable as to elicit despisal or deserve condemnation: abhorrent, abominable, antipathetic, contemptible, despicable, despisable, detestable, disgusting, filthy, foul, infamous, lousy, low, mean2, nasty, nefarious, obnoxious, odious, repugnant, rotten, shabby, vile, wretched.
Ah, no Mr. Mitchell, you’ve described your liberal media cohorts perfectly.
Rovin on July 26, 2010 at 11:52 AM
Oh, and if anyone has the time (I don’t), it would be very useful to have the comments cross-listed by author, so you could just click on, say Ezra Klein, and have his complete list of comments come up.
notropis on July 26, 2010 at 11:52 AM
Its not the cheerleading that is the problem. It is the collusion to shape the news reporting.
One guy writes an opinion piece in Time, network talking heads hold it up as proof that the country is behind Obama.
That is the problem. They can rah-rah for Obama all the want, it’s when they use their collective soapbox to influence the media message that is morally, ethically and potentially illegal.
Neo on July 26, 2010 at 11:53 AM
This line seems particularly hypocritical given the coordinated effort to bury Rev. Wright associations.
Of course, in terms of hypocrisy, this line was kind of cute, too (re: Palin’s speech):
Good thing the media help protect us from a candidate like that!
BlueCollarAstronaut on July 26, 2010 at 11:55 AM
I think the interesting aspect of this story really is that so many of the liberals involved did not question that they were skirting the edge of journalistic integrity.
They honestly appear not to have questioned themselves.
That’s the self-riteousness of thinking you’re “right.” It exists on the right, too.
And it totally sets aside journalisism ethical standards.
I think, honestly, since Watergate and the blurring of the lines between journalism and opinion, that’s what is the real hurdle for most of these very, very obviously young professionals. They have yet to learn that principles always survive; personal opinions do not.
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 11:55 AM
so, the media actually does choose the people for election. Who would have thunk that? *rolls eyes*
upinak on July 26, 2010 at 11:57 AM
Progressive Perception/Democrat Deception OnGoing
NeverEnding Spinning and Twirling Operations!!!!!!
canopfor on July 26, 2010 at 11:57 AM
So the left is as enamored with her as the rest of the country…it shows how powerful she really is.
right2bright on July 26, 2010 at 11:58 AM
I was amazed talking to the Dems who pushed Hillary aside and went for Obama. They really are unaware of their own dual standards.
These are young, young people who haven’t yet learned that they, too, can be guilty of any ISM, hypocritical, even downright unfair/mean.
Honestly, they thought Journolist was just innocent and a private on-line bar room where they could blow out.
Anyone over the age of 35 knows better.
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 11:59 AM
No, it doesn’t “exist on the right, too.”
Journalistic integrity isn’t even a factor for Journolist.
It’s driven by pure Leftist partisan ideology.
It’s the Clinton’s “nuts and sluts” strategy writ large.
Jenfidel on July 26, 2010 at 12:00 PM
Awk-ward!
Abby Adams on July 26, 2010 at 12:00 PM
If you truly believe this, you’re dumber than a box of rocks.
Sorry, but you are.
Jenfidel on July 26, 2010 at 12:01 PM
What jumped out at me was how many of them can’t really figure out their own stand without some form of support from others.
Wow……talk about immature political perspectives, there.
No wonder a lot of people avoided that list. I listened to Klein today, who is so young and sounded stupid on the entire war issue.
It’s amazing that this guy gets time on national TV, to me.
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:01 PM
I love how Palin’s “crackpot” church is fair game, but bringing up Reverend Wright was totally out of bounds. These people disgust me.
JohnInCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:02 PM
They didn’t just skirt it. They smashed its head through a plate glass window and took pictures of it for all to see.
Yes, we knew this decades ago.
Except that the right doesn’t own all the major news networks, newspapers, magazines, Hollywood, music, public broadcasting, etc. This is much more a problem of the left than the right. There really is no equivalent incident of similar size and scope you could compare this to on the right, simply because the mainstream press leans left and has for a long time.
Hence, it’s perfect for the Washington Post.
Well, unless the opinions are LIBERAL opinions. Then they’re trumpeted, repeated, re-repeated, re-re-repeated, reprinted, recycled and repeated again in their echo chambers of the press.
Good Lt on July 26, 2010 at 12:02 PM
“What’s wrong with journalists colluding to force a political message through their reporting?”
Read Benjamin Franklin’s autobiography.
crosspatch on July 26, 2010 at 12:02 PM
Now you can understand the Fear of this women by the media. Rush nailed it. they will tell us who they fear.
unseen on July 26, 2010 at 12:02 PM
Hello. Looked at Fox ratings lately?
The right has their voice, for sure.
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:04 PM
So this crap really is taught in J school…Who knew?
d1carter on July 26, 2010 at 11:48 AM
McCarthy for one
unseen on July 26, 2010 at 12:06 PM
Gosh, it seemed pretty much a nondescript fundamentalist church with a twang of new-age to me.
Not that anyone bothered to really report on the church much. I think I saw one story where they were anti-gay, which sort of struck me as interesting given the “witchdoctor” invite.
I still would be actually curious to read about the church.
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:06 PM
shocka…it’s their buddy, they’re not going to trash him
cmsinaz on July 26, 2010 at 12:06 PM
Ann, the fact that you were amazed is what amazes us.
HOW NAIVE DO YOU HAVE TO BE TO THINK THAT DEMOCRAT POLITICIANS ARE, AS A RULE, ETHICAL AND INTERESTED IN THE TRUTH?
Or anybody under 35 who has a brain. Which would exclude all young Obama voters.
Good Lt on July 26, 2010 at 12:07 PM
Hmm. Call me crazy…but that sounds pretty substantive.
And prescient.
powerpro on July 26, 2010 at 12:07 PM
There really is no equivalent incident of similar size and scope you could compare this to
Good Lt on July 26, 2010 at 12:02 PM
PRAVDA and Joseph Goebbels come to mind
unseen on July 26, 2010 at 12:08 PM
No, Ezra’s reply was 100% carefully crafted CYA language. It was designed to have on the record that the organizer did not want ‘official’ coordination. Yet, in the same breath, he gives the OK with a wink:
This language is by design, saying: “Go ahead, coordinate unofficially, we just have to be very careful about optics.”
Firefly_76 on July 26, 2010 at 12:08 PM
If you honestly believe that personal attacks are satisfying in any respect, then I’d say you’re the one who lacks any real sense of intelligence.
It isn’t.
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:09 PM
It would be interesting to go back and plot what these thugs actually wrote in their respective propaganda rags after these “discussions” on Jlist…
d1carter on July 26, 2010 at 12:09 PM
I’m wondering how these people got degrees in journalism? I also wonder if exposing them will have any repurcussions or if their editors even care.
scalleywag on July 26, 2010 at 12:09 PM
Too bad you can’t…because Sarah’s political enemies burned it down!
Aren’t you curious that Journolist showed no intellectual and journalistic curiousity about NObama’s weird church that preaches Black Liberation Theology or hate for America, our troops and white people in general?
Jenfidel on July 26, 2010 at 12:09 PM
That’s the “school” where a bunch of grad students were apparently caught cheating on an exam on “Journalistic Ethics”-an exam that was in fact a take-home, open-book exam.
Del Dolemonte on July 26, 2010 at 12:11 PM
I think it is fair to say that if the coordination had not ocurred, the media probably would not have been able to counter the obvious appeal that Sarah generated in her acceptance speech. I recall the stunned looks on the faces of the various pundits on TV after her speech. No way could individual journalists have been able to take her down. It took collective and coordinated effort, and they definitely called in the Journolist cavalry.
txmomof6 on July 26, 2010 at 12:11 PM
Honey, I may be rude and inconsiderate, but I’m not unintelligent.
Anyone who would believe these Journolist people are naive and innocent is dumber than dirt.
If they were young naifs, exposure of this list wouldn’t even be a story.
Jenfidel on July 26, 2010 at 12:11 PM
Irony of Ironies coming from the Friends of the O.
crazy_legs on July 26, 2010 at 12:11 PM
their editors keep repeating the mantra….’they were working for another organization when they were participating on this listserv’…they are ok with us now…
yeah, right
cmsinaz on July 26, 2010 at 12:13 PM
Yeah, as I wrote the other day: Somehow, I can’t see Charles Krauthammer, George Will, Thomas Sowell and Jonah Goldberg having to e-mail each other to get ideas for their columns and how best to present them.
What the journolist leaks reveal to me is a lack of orginial thinking on the left.
JohnInCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:13 PM
Ezra Klein was saying, “We can’t coordinate coordinate”
The Palin Trig Truther discussion is interesting, considering how quickly birthers are supposed to just shut up or be considered wacky.
MayBee on July 26, 2010 at 12:13 PM
Looking back, it’s almost scary how right on the money Sarah actually was, isn’t it?
Jenfidel on July 26, 2010 at 12:13 PM
Was it truly burned down? I thought they got the fire out.
And no, but my ex-husband was an early member of some similar journalism list-server. He teaches in J-school, think he’s the head of the dept. today. And he said way back in the 80′s that it was nothing but junk opinionators and snark stuff, probably a lot like talking to some of you with your snot remarks.
It was not really a place to exchange intelligent reactions, in short.
I think what’s perplexing me is how Klein, so immature in so many ways, gets a national voice.
Why?
What the heck has he done that warrants that, in the least?
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:13 PM
It took collective and coordinated effort, and they definitely called in the Journolist cavalry.
txmomof6 on July 26, 2010 at 12:11 PM
It is still requiring that effort. Everytime Palin has a good day, a good speech, a good week the negative stories fly fast and furiours for days afterword. Most of them simply made up crap taken from the “journalist” blogs.
the fact that Palin continues to grow in favs and popularity inspite of this effort tells anyone with a mind how great a politican Palin is.
unseen on July 26, 2010 at 12:14 PM
Read Saul Alinsky much?
And don’t forget the personal attacks your hero Bill Clinton employed, AKA “the politics of personal destruction”. He tried to deflect his criminal perjury by attacking Ken Starr for daring to pursue him for lying under oath about sex-something that his own Justice Department has already done when they prosecuted a female Federal employee for doing the same thing.
Del Dolemonte on July 26, 2010 at 12:16 PM
Why don’t you think long and hard about your question and get back to us when you have the answer.
It will tell you all you need to know.
Here’s a hint: “Useful idiot.”
Jenfidel on July 26, 2010 at 12:17 PM
Winston Smith, please pick up the white courtesy telephone.
Emperor Norton on July 26, 2010 at 12:19 PM
Re let’s campaign for Obama, Ramirez as usual has the perfect take on this: Ramirez on Journolist
slickwillie2001 on July 26, 2010 at 12:21 PM
Gitlin is on the faculty at Columbia School of Journalism.
Here’s a page of contacts. Drop the Dean an e-mail. I did.
http://www.journalism.columbia.edu/cs/ContentServer/jrn/1165270051146/page/1165270083076/JRNStaffList.htm
BuckeyeSam on July 26, 2010 at 12:24 PM
I think the real story is still in the “bones” of some of the young journalists. They went into journalism after Watergate, and their focus is on breaking the big story that “saves” the country.
They aren’t remotely interested in real journalism, which is often quite boring and goes “nowhere.”
These are guys/gals who want to break a big story. I personally thought the WP story was just such an accomplishment, about the disarray in the intelligence community.
Palin has a right to complain. It’s gone past the line of reasonable. So does Obama, for that matter.
And I think both sides are JUST about out of complaint chits. From now on, either you deal effectively…..or you don’t.
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:24 PM
Refudiating would be more appropriate.
Emperor Norton on July 26, 2010 at 12:25 PM
We must agree to not talk. LOL*
Kenn Starr was truly without ethical boundaries.
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:25 PM
This journolist nonsense remeinds of the cliques in junior high.
booter on July 26, 2010 at 12:28 PM
Columbia? That’s not a particularly good school for real journalists entering into the market. Big name, but rather “in the clouds.”
No, my ex-husband actually heads up a dept. that is producing a lot of the current crop.
And it’s extremely liberal, very focused on the Latino market.
Long-time reputation, too. Bigger than Columbia in terms of graduates that are big names.
I definitely know that J-School has zip to do with producing fair journalists, although they do focus on teaching people how to collect supporting facts.
To support a viewpoint. :)
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:29 PM
He also tried to use the Oklahoma City bombing to attack Rush and conservatives, to blame them for “creating the environment” which enabled McViegh.
Simply unforgivable, and disgusting.
Brian1972 on July 26, 2010 at 12:29 PM
So true!
txmomof6 on July 26, 2010 at 12:29 PM
That’s exactly what my ex-husband thought, and he’s a liberal as they come. Even he avoided them.
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:30 PM
ted c on July 26, 2010 at 12:31 PM
Journalism, from Watergate forward, has been moving ever Leftward towards being nothing but propaganda, although it should never be forgotten that the NYTimes was whitewashing the debacle of Stalinist Soviet Russia as far back as the 1930′s.
Ann, give up your dreams of naivete and innocence.
These people have a partisan political and ideological agenda.
Reporting the news objectively disappeared many, many moons ago.
You did highlight an interesting thing, though: I’m convinced that there’s something like Journolist operating to not only torpedo the campaigns of Republicans, but to skew war news, also…or even worse, all news all the time.
Virtually everything is skewed to the Left but whether it is a concerted effort like the one noted in this story remains to be revealed and proven.
Of course, journalism majors, along with everyone else, are indoctrinated in Leftism in our universities, especially the revered Columbia School of Journalism.
Jenfidel on July 26, 2010 at 12:32 PM
Look, guys, political hacks aren’t a bit different than PR hacks or any other type of hack-writer.
We’re paying real hacks, on both sides, a load of money. That doesn’t change the reality that they are hacks.
Really.
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:33 PM
People need to understand why Ezra posted that. Explicit message coordination (especially if there were Obama campaign officials on JournoList) implicates several campaign laws and FEC regulations. Most “coordination” is not as explicit as people sending e-mails on a listserv saying “ok everyone, let’s coordinate the message!” The fact someone on JournoList was dumb enough to actually SAY that was astounding. So, of course Ezra Klein had to immediately say “no, you can’t coordinate.” But there’s not much difference between: “Ok, reporter A runs with this story, and reporter B runs with that story” (explicit coordination) and “boy, it’d be nice if someone featured these issues, *nudge*” (implicit coordination).
Outlander on July 26, 2010 at 12:34 PM
Gee, I wish I would have gotten my PhD at Columbia; I could have fabricated and/or plagiarized my dissertation. Damn! All that hard work for nothing.
College Prof on July 26, 2010 at 12:35 PM
How’s that?
How was he “without ethical boundaries?”
You see, you bought this narrative hook, line and sinker without question and without even bothering to find out if it’s true.
Journolist and the Leftist MSM loves gullible people like you.
You accept whatever they say as “fact.”
Jenfidel on July 26, 2010 at 12:35 PM
If %90-%95 of people working in the journalism business have a common ideology and world view, it is not unreasonable to expect most of them to independently come to similar conclusions about conservatives, who are their enemy.
Many of them get their ideas from other liberal opinion makers in the public media, seizing on some op-ed and adding their own twist to it, as people on the right do.
The really damning thing to me is the comment about the “un-official campaign”. That proves what people like Brent Bozell have been saying for 20 years.
Brian1972 on July 26, 2010 at 12:37 PM
Compared to the combined audiences of the network news, mainstream papers and magazines, Fox really pales in comparison to the number of contacts/viewers. One cable channel versus 3 main network channes. One cable channel versus several MSM newspapers? One cable channel versus several leftie magazines like Time/Newsweek etc.? The right has their voice, but the left has multiple voices and a wider reach, moreover coordinated effects–ie JournoList.
ted c on July 26, 2010 at 12:37 PM
“There is little doubt that Journolisters used the listserv for cheerleading and campaigning. In most cases, that would be as surprising as hearing that journalists talk politics at bars, and worthy of the same level of outrage. ”
They are really honest people with an occasional outlier, aren’t they Ed?
Defend them to the death. Townhall wants you to.
notagool on July 26, 2010 at 12:38 PM
Here’s what you’ll never quite get.
Stupid is stupid, Jen.
It doesn’t matter which side.
Stupid is stupid.
And you can call me naive all you wish. So do the lefties I chat with.
But what I know, in my absolute gut, is that people who have raised families, run businesses, started careers, figured out how to end careers, figured out how to handle the mother-in-law, figured out how to keep the wife happy, handled divorce, handled death of a child, handled the birth of a child who has a disability, figured out how to handle the loss of health benefits……..etc.
Are not stupid.
And you’re stupid to think they are. Ditto for many politicians.
The ones that will hit the mark with message get this and will have a core attitude of respect. Regardless of the positions, people will respect that.
And those who don’t, won’t.
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:38 PM
Who’s “we?”
and how are “we” “paying” them?
All the hacks are on the Left.
By the way, if you’re so sure there are “hacks, on both sides,” why don’t you name a few on the Right?
Journalists on the Right have a certain standard that they try and comply with called the Truth.
By the way, are you accusing Ed and AP of being “hacks?”
Jenfidel on July 26, 2010 at 12:39 PM
Andrew Sullivan: Fap! fap! fap!
lorien1973 on July 26, 2010 at 12:39 PM
Look guys, “coordinating” isn’t legal. So let’s keep conversing without using that particular word again.
MayBee on July 26, 2010 at 12:39 PM
Agree to disagree. Ken is a hack of the worst type.
You wish to elevate him?
Not surprised, frankly. See my last post.
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:39 PM
What are you babbling about?!?
Who is your typing teacher?
I want to do grievous bodily harm to them for teaching you how to type and use a computer.
Jenfidel on July 26, 2010 at 12:41 PM
Kinda reminds me of the Climategate emails. These collectivists are all from the same terrible mold. Their goal is control. Truth and science are optional.
JeffB. on July 26, 2010 at 12:41 PM
Oh really?
LOL*
That was the remark that made me laugh.
What in the world is he talking about? That’s the entire point of any editorial board…….coordinate.
It showed a real naive viewpoint when he said that. No wonder he didn’t realize what the heck he was setting up for future expose with this discussion.
What a nitwit.
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:41 PM
Define “hack.”
Ken Starr succeed in impeaching Clinton, so there was something non-hack-ish about his investigation of Slick Willie.
Your last post is close to incoherent and totally OT.
Jenfidel on July 26, 2010 at 12:43 PM
Let’s say a number of CEOs or sales persons from competing companies got together secretly and coordinated how they were going to establish their prices for their competing goods.
It’s called “Price Fixing” and people got to jail. What is the commodity here? News. What is the currency? The reader’s/viewer’s trust.
This should be a criminal offense.
kurtzz3 on July 26, 2010 at 12:45 PM
Maybe for the same paper, but these people were all from different media organs.
What they did is beginning to resemble a criminal conspiracy.
*ahem*
I wouldn’t throw that term around if I were you.
Jenfidel on July 26, 2010 at 12:45 PM
Compared to the combined audiences of the network news, mainstream papers and magazines, Fox really pales in comparison to the number of contacts/viewers. One cable channel versus 3 main network channes. One cable channel versus several MSM newspapers? One cable channel versus several leftie magazines like Time/Newsweek etc.? The right has their voice, but the left has multiple voices and a wider reach, moreover coordinated effects–ie JournoList.
ted c on July 26, 2010 at 12:37 PM
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:45 PM
What’s troubling to me is that they mention The Guardian which is a British Leftist paper.
This shows the conspiracy to be not only national, but international.
Very, very troubling.
Jenfidel on July 26, 2010 at 12:46 PM
He is the left’s leading “expert” on healthcare policy.
Nope. You’ve got that wrong. Klein is a “young turk”.
He’d be a useful idiot, if he were on our side.
gh on July 26, 2010 at 12:46 PM
This should be repeated.
tetriskid on July 26, 2010 at 12:47 PM
Let’s just avoid exchanging opinions. You’ve devolved into nothing but snark in the last 3 posts.
It bores others, Jen.
AnninCA on July 26, 2010 at 12:47 PM
What’s “our side?”
Jenfidel on July 26, 2010 at 12:48 PM
LOL. Oh be nice. It’s amusing seeing Ann being bitten by reality.
gh on July 26, 2010 at 12:48 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »