Perhaps We Should Perform An Intervention On The Media
I love reading New York Times media reporter/columnist David Carr, but his piece on the U-T San Diego newspaper this weekend was hilarious. Unintentionally so. It's a bitter attack ("a virtual and digital heart attack") on owners of newspapers using their publication to advance a particular agenda. It is not (I repeat: not) about the New York Times.
Here's how it begins:
There is a growing worry that the falling value and failing business models of many American newspapers could lead to a situation where moneyed interests buy papers and use them to prosecute a political and commercial agenda.
That future appears to have arrived in San Diego, where The U-T San Diego, the daily newspaper bought by the local developer and hotelier Douglas F. Manchester, often seems like a brochure for his various interests.
Mr. Manchester is anti-big government, anti-tax and anti-gay marriage.
I know I've got to stop quoting James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal but, "HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA." Seriously. It's perfectly fine to attack a publication for advancing certain political interests, not that Carr actually makes a solid case that this is what's happening at the U-T. But it is not OK to do that if you literally write for the New York Times. Unless, that is, you're acknowledging the complete hypocrisy of doing so. Carr does not. The lack of introspection in the media business is really fascinating to me.
Speaking of using a newspaper to advance a particular agenda, I wrote up an analysis of coverage of the 150-or-so religious freedom rallies that were held around the country on Friday. Some of the stories are spectacularly awful. (You won't believe the way the Chicago rally was covered by Reuters.) But a commenter noted that none of the top three New York City papers even covered the rallies:
Not a word in the three major NY newspapers. Not a word.
The Times, of course, managed to have a big story on the dissenting nun’s bus tour. All the usual gossip nonsense in the Post and News.
Perhaps at the next rally we should invite a few inebriated barely-clothed celebrities, or a heretical nun or two.
NPR didn't cover the rallies, but it did manage a good 14 minutes on nuns opposed to Paul Ryan and/or the Vatican.
And if you're in the mood, you may be interested in Moe Lane's catalogue of "insults, negative portrayals, and generally offensive rhetoric found in this NYT article by liberal Steve Almond calling for… more civility from liberals."
Again, there are many great reporters and the media can be good at investigating corruption and other problems in most industries. When it comes to their own problems, though, it's almost like they need an intervention.
- Comment (14)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments:
Dec '10
Re: Perhaps We Should Perform An Intervention On The Media
This guy needs to learn a little history. At this country's founding virtually all papers were used to advocate the owner's viewpoint. That was the point. The idea of an unbiased press came somewhat later. Personally, I do not think it's possible to be unbiased.
Jan '12
Re: Perhaps We Should Perform An Intervention On The Media
I think you're a bit too generous in saying there "there are many great reporters." Maybe the intervention should be similar to Gen. Sherman's wartime policy in Savannah. He apparently knew what most journalists were really up to.
Jan '11
Re: Perhaps We Should Perform An Intervention On The Media
Bear with me for a moment.
So, we adjust. There's no such thing as perfect objectivity, so we take everything with a grain of salt. We make "adjustments."
What makes the New York Times so offensive is not that they have an opinion or agenda ... it's that they claim that they don't. If you "adjust" their information or their analysis, they're offended, and they openly question your intelligence.
Phooey. They're the ones who don't know math.
Edited on June 11, 2012 at 5:58pmJul '11
Re: Perhaps We Should Perform An Intervention On The Media
Without Benjamin Franklin's newspaper with an "agenda", there would be not "this country".
The tragedy of America is that Americans don't know their own history.
Dec '10
Re: Perhaps We Should Perform An Intervention On The Media
KC Mulville: Bear with me for a moment.
What makes theNew York Timesso offensive is not that they have an opinion or agenda ... it's that they claim that they don't. If you "adjust" their information or their analysis, they're offended, and they openly question your intelligence.
Phooey. They're the ones who don't know math. · 22 minutes ago
Edited 21 minutes ago
I'm with you 100%
Apr '11
Re: Perhaps We Should Perform An Intervention On The Media
Just saw this piece in the NYT this morning, and I had to rub my eyes to make sure I was reading right.
I must prefer to know someone's biases than to be assured that no biases exist at all.
Jun '10
Re: Perhaps We Should Perform An Intervention On The Media
MSNBC is practically an Obama PAC all by itself. If anybody watched it, it would worry me.
Dec '11
Re: Perhaps We Should Perform An Intervention On The Media
I think Mr. Buffett just bought my local paper.
Aug '11
Re: Perhaps We Should Perform An Intervention On The Media
This whole thing goes back to Jonah Goldberg's new book Tyranny of Cliches. The Left loves the idea that they aren't ideological. And someone mentioned the Steve Almond piece (a joke)-- there is sometimes a lack of self-reflection in the left (even when they pretend to be self-reflective).
I don't see anything wrong about someone being honest with both themselves and their viewers about what perspective they're coming from.
Mar '11
Re: Perhaps We Should Perform An Intervention On The Media
Mr. Buffet just bought dozens of papers.
Aug '10
Re: Perhaps We Should Perform An Intervention On The Media
Goldgeller: This whole thing goes back to Jonah Goldberg's new book Tyranny of Cliches. The Left loves the idea that they aren't ideological. And someone mentioned the Steve Almond piece (a joke)-- there is sometimes a lack of self-reflection in the left (even when they pretend to be self-reflective).
I don't see anything wrong about someone being honest with both themselves and their viewers about what perspective they're coming from. · 36 minutes ago
Jonah must love it when the Leftist media guys keep proving his point. Over and over and over again. Gotta be good for books sales.
Jul '10
Re: Perhaps We Should Perform An Intervention On The Media
That Almond piece is really interesting: he actually thinks the only reason Fox News et al are popular and have high ratings is because liberals pay attention to them. The concept of an under-served media market for conservative opinion simply doesn't occur to him.
It's like the liberal journalist's equivalent of "white privilege". He's Pauline Kael with a furrowed brow.
Jul '10
Re: Perhaps We Should Perform An Intervention On The Media
It's the hive mind at work. Contrary information, let alone opinion, simply doesn't exist for the cubicle workers at the big papers. They are as theoretical as quarks and dark matter.
May '11
Re: Perhaps We Should Perform An Intervention On The Media
As a resident of San Diego County, I can tell you that the paper is much slimmer, but much less potentially stroke-inducing since Doug Manchester took it over. The editorials finally make sense. If the libs want a paper that pushes their point of view, the LA Times offers home delivery down here as well.