Sure, the Republican bullshit on health care reform ("death panels", "government takeover of the economy") and financial reform ("more bailouts") either gets repeated uncritically by the MSM or amplified by Fox News. That ain't a news flash. If it is, spend some time here and here.
But just as I had focused on the lubricant that lets Republican bullshit slide by so frictionlessly, leave it to GG to keep me in check regarding something on the other side of the aisle, something less obvious but no less pernicious:
National political reporters are furious over various White House practices involving transparency and information control, but are unwilling to say so for attribution due to fear of "retaliation," instead insisting on hiding behind a wall of anonymity (which Politico, needless to say, happily provides). Isn't that a rather serious problem: that the White House press corps is afraid to criticize the President and the White House for fear of losing access and suffering other forms of retribution? What does that say about their "journalism"? It's the flip side of those White House reporters who need the good graces of Obama aides for their behind-the-scenes books and thus desperately do their bidding: what kind of reporter covering the White House would possibly admit that they're afraid to say anything with their names attached that might anger the President and his aides? How could you possibly be a minimally credible White House reporter if you have that fear? Doesn't that unwillingness rather obviously render their reporting worthless?Worthless, for sure. And dangerous, too. This same dynamic helped us march uncritically into our unending War on Terror.
[Ignore "Read More"]
No comments:
Post a Comment