Originally Posted by Kiff 1961

Andy, there are certain segments of the public who believe that Bush has been given a free ride by the mainstream media for quite some time, and now that the coverage is more critical, the pro-war crowd are now screaming "bias, bias!" all over the place.

Unfortunately for them, the people who believe the press is biased in favor of Bush are objectively wrong. Which is why the liberal radio network is imploding. The liberal audience is more-or-less served by the regular media, it was the conservatives who were chafing for an alternative.

At each step of the growth of 'right-wing media', the prediction was that there was no audience, it would appeal to a fringe, etc. This was said at the founding of the Washington Times, when Limbaugh started, when NewsMax started, etc.

To this day, their rivals simply refuse to face the source of Fox News' success squarely. They didn't believe Fox would go anywhere, and when it topped them in most markets they tried to ascribe it to 'sensationalism'. No, it's just that the right-wing marget still hadn't reached saturation. They refuse to accept why shows like The O'Reilly Factor keep skunking their rivals in the ratings.

So they figured they'd tap the untouched liberal audience with a liberal radio net, but their problem was twofold:

1. Limbaugh, whatever one thinks of his politics, beliefs, or personal morality, is unquestionably the most talented radio broadcaster in the game today, maybe the most talented ever. He was almost single-handedly responsible for the renaissance of AM radio. The libs tried to set Al Franken and Co. against him, which was like sending Woody Allen up against Mike Tyson in a boxing ring.

2. Much more importantly, there was no untapped audience looking for a source, no underserved market. That was the true, core secret of the success of Fox News, the Washington Times, Drudge, etc. There was an underserved and increasingly frustrated and quite large market, and they stepped in and provided a service that was profitable and popular. If they hadn't, it wouldn't have been long before someone else did, the opportunity was there.

The liberal audience has CBS, NBC, ABC, MsNBC, even moreso they've got CNN. They have PBS and NPR, which have the additional advantage of being tax-supported. They've got 60 Minutes, they've got Katie Couric, they've got Hollywood, etc. When they try to match Drudge, they end up producing partison spin-sites instead, like Buzzflash (who like to imagine they are the liberal version of Drudge, and who are kidding themselves, Drudge is admittedly right-wing, but he covers stories and links to stories from all directions, Buzzflash might as well be on a direct-line to liberal faction of the DNC).

It's only the hardest-core liberals, and the hardest-core anti-warriors, who are sufficiently frustrated by the media options to imagine that the media is biased in favor of conservatives. By themselves, they just don't make up a large enough group to sustain a liberal radio network.

Originally Posted by Kiff 1961

Andy, there are certain segments of the public who believe that Bush has been given a free ride by the mainstream media for quite some time, and now that the coverage is more critical, the pro-war crowd are now screaming "bias, bias!" all over the place.

Unfortunately for them, the people who believe the press is biased in favor of Bush are objectively wrong. Which is why the liberal radio network is imploding. The liberal audience is more-or-less served by the regular media, it was the conservatives who were chafing for an alternative.

At each step of the growth of 'right-wing media', the prediction was that there was no audience, it would appeal to a fringe, etc. This was said at the founding of the Washington Times, when Limbaugh started, when NewsMax started, etc.

To this day, their rivals simply refuse to face the source of Fox News' success squarely. They didn't believe Fox would go anywhere, and when it topped them in most markets they tried to ascribe it to 'sensationalism'. No, it's just that the right-wing marget still hadn't reached saturation. They refuse to accept why shows like The O'Reilly Factor keep skunking their rivals in the ratings.

So they figured they'd tap the untouched liberal audience with a liberal radio net, but their problem was twofold:

1. Limbaugh, whatever one thinks of his politics, beliefs, or personal morality, is unquestionably the most talented radio broadcaster in the game today, maybe the most talented ever. He was almost single-handedly responsible for the renaissance of AM radio. The libs tried to set Al Franken and Co. against him, which was like sending Woody Allen up against Mike Tyson in a boxing ring.

2. Much more importantly, there was no untapped audience looking for a source, no underserved market. That was the true, core secret of the success of Fox News, the Washington Times, Drudge, etc. There was an underserved and increasingly frustrated and quite large market, and they stepped in and provided a service that was profitable and popular. If they hadn't, it wouldn't have been long before someone else did, the opportunity was there.

The liberal audience has CBS, NBC, ABC, MsNBC, even moreso they've got CNN. They have PBS and NPR, which have the additional advantage of being tax-supported. They've got 60 Minutes, they've got Katie Couric, they've got Hollywood, etc. When they try to match Drudge, they end up producing partison spin-sites instead, like Buzzflash (who like to imagine they are the liberal version of Drudge, and who are kidding themselves, Drudge is admittedly right-wing, but he covers stories and links to stories from all directions, Buzzflash might as well be on a direct-line to liberal faction of the DNC).

It's only the hardest-core liberals, and the hardest-core anti-warriors, who are sufficiently frustrated by the media options to imagine that the media is biased in favor of conservatives. By themselves, they just don't make up a large enough group to sustain a liberal radio network.

Movies are a media, so I'll file this here.

Cannes Fesitval Abuzz Over German Film

I won't quote the entire discussion, it's about a German film about socialist burglars, more or less. But the following comment is interesting, and in my view contains a profound insight about how our modern society and culture interact with commercial entities.

"We don't know where to put our revolutionary energy and we don't know how to fight the system because we can't grab it, we don't know how to attack it," he said. "The system has become so invulnerable because it sells revolution to us."

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Unfortunately for them, the people who believe the press is biased in favor of Bush are objectively wrong. Which is why the liberal radio network is imploding. The liberal audience is more-or-less served by the regular media, it was the conservatives who were chafing for an alternative.

Actually, it isn't. The blogosphere has served as an alternative for many liberals who aren't happy with the mainstream media, or NPR or PBS either.

And as far as I know, Air America is still broadcasting, and still planning to expand its market.

Originally Posted by Kiff 1961

And as far as I know, Air America is still broadcasting, and still planning to expand its market.

They're barely making payroll, and losing even the affiliates they started with. Unless they come up with something better than what they've got, and fast, they're finished.

They made several errors. Along with the ones I named, they tried to 'go national' to start. The right-wing radio types, even Limbaugh himself, all started in local markets, and established their 'draw power' there before they went region and national. It did not happen in a single stroke.

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Originally Posted by Kiff 1961

And as far as I know, Air America is still broadcasting, and still planning to expand its market.

They're barely making payroll, and losing even the affiliates they started with. Unless they come up with something better than what they've got, and fast, they're finished.

They made several errors. Along with the ones I named, they tried to 'go national' to start. The right-wing radio types, even Limbaugh himself, all started in local markets, and established their 'draw power' there before they went region and national. It did not happen in a single stroke.

Which gives some insight as to how censorship of the market works. One has to figure out what your listeners want to hear in order to build ratings enough to be popular. I believe ratings driven self-censorship shapes what goes on the air much more than demands for slanted coverage from corporate owners, threats of withdrawn ad money if the wrong political agenda is pushed, or deliberate projection of reporter's personal politics.

But all four elements might be in place, in different amounts, depending on the news source.

http://chrenkoff.blogspot.com/2004_0...93214609755777

Prisoner abuse, Shia uprising, prisoner abuse, Fallujah, prisoner abuse, lost heart and minds, prisoner abuse... Oh, did I mention prisoner abuse?

The news from Iraq has been consistently bad for two month now, with one "quagmire" after another cheering up the media, the left and the "Arab street", and depressing the hell out of most conservatives.

So, for a change, here's some good news from Iraq that you might have missed (I don't know how that could have happened):

DEMOCRACY TAKES ROOT: Democracy is spreading - from the ground up, as it should: "In the province of Dhi Qar, about 230 miles southeast of Baghdad and a backwater even by Iraq's standards, residents voting as families will have elected city councils in 16 of the 20 biggest cities by next month."

And in Baghdad, "American authorities created nine district councils... with representatives sent by 88 neighborhood advisory councils. The district councils, in turn, sent representatives to the Baghdad City Advisory Council to work with the American administration." "Every day the evidence is a little stronger that the council members understand the benefits of this system, and we even see signs out in the community of it catching on."

Meanwhile, a Western PR firm, with Arab partners, tackles the world's toughest ad campaign - selling democracy to Iraqis accustomed to life under a dictatorship.

HEALTHIER, WEALTHIER AND WISER: "[M]y salary was about 17 US$ before the war. Shortly after the war it was raised to 120 US$. Three months after that, they made it 150 US$. Two months later it became 200$... [and] from the next month... [it] will be around 300 US$" - read the whole extensive piece on salaries, unemployment, and the standard of living. It makes a fascinating living.

And there's also good news for retired government employees, who are finally getting decent pensions. And the 80,000 needy families, who are being taken care of by the Iraqi Minister of Labour and Public Affairs (with 300,000 more by the year's end). According to the Minister, Sami Azara Al Majoon: "We have rehabilitated the orphanages, the centres for the handicapped and special needs institutions in Iraq, as well as the institutions for the deaf and blind. Work is on to accommodate all the homeless and orphaned children and ensure the needs of the handicapped. In addition, we have opened 28 offices for the ministry in different parts of the country to accept applications of Iraqi citizens in search of employment and job training."

Meanwhile, on the education front, "more than five million Iraqi students are back in school and more than 51 million new Ba'ath-free textbooks are in circulation." And Iraqi universities are experiencing a brain drain in reverse, as many of the thousands of academics forced into exile under Saddam are coming back to teach the next generation of students.

And in health, "some 100,000 healthcare professionals working in 240 re-opened hospitals and 1,200 clinics." The health system has to be rebuilt almost from scratch: "[it] was 'already badly run down' due to previous wars, sanctions, drastically reduced spending - some estimates suggest the Iraqi health budget was cut by 90 per cent during the 1990s - as well as an inequitable health treatment policy."

SPIRITS REVIVE: "In a stunning upset victory, the Iraq national football team defeated Saudi Arabia tonight 3 to 1 to earn a trip to the 2004 Olympic Summer games in Athens." It's the first time in Iraq's history that Iraqi football team will compete in the Olympics. Better still, while the victory over Saudi Arabia was played at a stadium once used by Saddam as an outdoor torture chamber, Iraqi soccer player know that if they fail in the future they won't be tortured by Uday Hussein.

Other areas of life previously suppressed are experiencing cultural revival - like traditional Kurdish music. "Before, Arab music was the most popular, but now even the latest albums aren't selling... Many more people are buying Kurdish music," says Niyaz Zangana, who runs the popular Zang record store in Arbil.

Not just Kurds, but also Marsh Arabs, whose homeland was destroyed by Saddam as collective punishment for rebellion, are reviving. With the marshes being reflooded and ecosystem restored, the ancient culture is returning to the mouths of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers.

THE RECONSTRUCTION: "Iraqi crude oil sales since last year's U.S.-led invasion hit more than $9 billion... The Coalition Provisional Authority had deposited a total of $9.28 billion in its Development Fund for Iraq."

"Some 20,000 contractors are doing business in the country with relatively few security problems... Most are sharing in the $18.4 billion that has been allocated by the U.S. government to rebuild roads, public utilities, schools, housing and other parts of the Iraq economy."

John Roberts, a contracting officer with the Army Corps of Engineers, says: "Saddam Hussein used power as a reward and punishment... Power's important to us (Americans) because we see power as relating to the people." While the Army Corps of Engineers has been mostly restoring oil infrastructure, it is also "creating and improving ports, airports, roads, bridges, schools and health clinics. The corps has replaced more than 700 electrical towers throughout Iraq, Roberts said. The goal is to restore 6,000 megawatts to the national grid by June 1. About 4,500 megawatts are currently on the national grid."

In fact, overall "about 2,200 different [reconstruction] projects worth around US$2.5 billion were under way, with 18,000 already completed. Targets had been met with oil production, which was back to 2.3 million barrels a day, clean drinking water and power."

Meanwhile, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce welcomes the establishment of an American Chamber of Commerce in Iraq -- "AmCham for short."

And while the big guys work on the big stuff, a lot of private charity work is going on under the radar, be it donations of toys for Iraqi children, helping with supplies and equipment for Iraqi schools, or this latest appeal: "In response to a request from the U.S. 1st Marine Division, Spirit of America donated 10,000 school supply kits, 3 tons of medical supplies and 2 tons of Frisbees printed with 'Friendship' in English and Arabic. These items will be given to Iraqis by the Marines as gifts of friendship from the American people."

THE SECURITY SITUATION: Fallujah is revolting and al-Sadr is stirring trouble in the Shia south, but the Kurd-controlled areas are going so well that you never hear anything about them: "American soldiers based here don't have to call in air strikes against foreign fighters or exchange gunfire with Baathist loyalists. Nor do they live in mortal fear of deadly IEDs, or improvised explosive devices, along the roadsides. In fact, says one soldier who travels in this area, 'I always see the thumbs up, and little kids offer us candies'."

Speaking of Fallujah, the US-appointed retired major-general, Mohammed Abdul-Latif, seems to be having a calming effect on the locals: "We can make [the US] use their rifles against us or we can make them build our country, it's your choice," he has told "a gathering of more than 40 sheikhs, city council members and imams in an eastern Fallujah suburb... As he spoke, many sheikhs nodded in approval and listened with reverence. Later, they clasped his hands and patted him on the back."

Elsewhere, "Accused of being collaborators with American occupation forces, Iraqi policemen, guards, and soldiers have endured ridicule, threats, and targeted violence that have left hundreds dead over the past year. But there are signs that hard-nosed attitudes toward the country's embattled, US-trained security forces are beginning to soften."

THE REAL PRISONER ABUSE: The story of nine Iraqis sent to Abu Ghraib prison on flimsy charges, tortured, mutilated and filmed for amusement. By Saddam Hussein. The nine men in question had their hands chopped off; now Americans are giving them new ones.

THE MIDDLE EASTERN DOMINOES: "We went to the Arab countries and said, 'Look, you need to come together with a blueprint for Arab reform. If you do not articulate such a blueprint, one may be forced upon you.' We in Jordan are in the clear: We have our plans and are not using regional problems as an excuse. We are moving forward, as are some of the other moderate countries. But the rest of you, 'Wake up!' The Middle East is changing. If you don't get that process going, one will be forced on you." - King Abdullah of Jordan in an interview with "Washington Post".

Had enough? Now back to prisoner abuse, al-Sadr, terrorism, prisoner abuse...

Originally Posted by Kiff 1961

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Unfortunately for them, the people who believe the press is biased in favor of Bush are objectively wrong. Which is why the liberal radio network is imploding. The liberal audience is more-or-less served by the regular media, it was the conservatives who were chafing for an alternative.

Actually, it isn't. The blogosphere has served as an alternative for many liberals who aren't happy with the mainstream media, or NPR or PBS either.

True, but there is 'many' and than there is many. There is a matching right-wing blogosphere. The blogospheres, for the most part, draw the hard-core types, along with the small percentage of unaligned types or swing-types who follow politics in close detail.

Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity reach more people in one day than either side's blogosphere does (in practical terms) in a month. Many of the listeners of those shows are not regular right-wing blogophiles, they don't follow it that closely. What Air America was intended to do was reach a matching liberal audience, and it's failing in part because that matching semi-casual liberal auidence is already listening to NPR and watch CBS and ABC and CNN.

These results are from an ABCNEWS poll conducted among a random, representative sample of 2,737 Iraqis in face-to-face interviews across the country from Feb. 9-28.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/
GoodMorningAmerica/Iraq_anniversary_poll_040314.html

Pre-war vs. post-war:

Your family's protection from crime: 50.5 percent say things are better now; 38.6 percent, worse.

The security situation: 53.6 percent of respondents say things are better now; 26.4 percent, worse.

Availability of jobs: 38.9 percent, better; 25.3 percent, worse.

Supply of electricity: 43.4 percent, better; 23.0 percent worse.

Availability of clean water: 41.3 percent, better; 16.4 percent, worse.

Availability of medical care: 44.3 percent better; 15.6 percent, worse.

Local schools: 46.9 percent better; 9.4 percent, worse.

Local government: 44.4 percent better, 16.4 percent worse.

The availability of household basics: 44.2 percent better, 16.9 percent worse.

==================== ====================

The USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll of 3,444 Iraqis, the largest and most comprehensive poll in Iraq since last year's invasion, was administered by the Pan Arab Research Center of Dubai. Interviews were conducted between March 22 and April 2, with the exception of the governate of Sulaymaniya where interviews ran through April 9. All interviews were conducted in person in the respondent's home, with an average interview length of 70 minutes. The cooperation rate - the percentage of those contacted who agreed to be interviewed - was 98%.


http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/
2004-04-28-gallup-iraq-findings.htm

Thinking about any hardships you might have suffered since the US/British invasion, do you personally think that ousting Saddam Hussein was worth it or not?

Worth it: 61%
Not worth it: 38%

Are you and your family much better off, somewhat better off, somewhat worse off or much worse off than before the US invasion?

Better off: 51% (combining "much better" and "better')
Worse off: 25% (combining "much worse" and "worse')

Has there been an increase or a decrease in the family income compared to that of before the war?

Increase: 41%
Decrease: 16%

Have you been afraid to worship?

Last 4 weeks: 5%
Before the war: 54%

Would Saddam Hussein have been removed from power by Iraqis if US/British forces had not taken direct military action?

Yes: 4%
No: 89%

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

What Air America was intended to do was reach a matching liberal audience, and it's failing in part because that matching semi-casual liberal auidence is already listening to NPR and watch CBS and ABC and CNN.

If you check out some of the lefty blogs, you'll find a fair level of dissatisfaction with the "so-called liberal media."

Air America is unabashedly pro-liberal in its approach, unlike those other networks which at least need to have the appearance of being balanced. As I've said before, up to this point there hadn't been any lefty equivalent of Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity on the air. Now there's Al Franken and Randi Rhodes.

Ms. Rhodes did have a regional base (in Florida, I believe) before going national on Air America.

Right now I can't hear AA in my car anymore on the way to and from work since the deal with the Chicago station fell apart :-(, but when I'm at home I can listen to the streaming audio, which comes in loud and clear.

As to whether AA is "failing" or not -- well, I'd say it is struggling, but it hasn't failed yet.

Originally Posted by Kiff 1961

If you check out some of the lefty blogs, you'll find a fair level of dissatisfaction with the "so-called liberal media."

Visiting one lefty site (this one) is about all I can handle, thanks. But I am curious, what sort of *specific* things are these folks unhappy about with the mainstream media?

What Liberal Media? by Eric Alterman would be one source to check out, if you're interested. Alterman also has a blog.

Originally Posted by Kiff 1961

What Liberal Media? by Eric Alterman would be one source to check out, if you're interested. Alterman also has a blog.

Oh, you mean the same guy who said "I wish the guy [Rush Limbaugh] would have gone deaf"? :?

No thanks. Quite frankly, if you guys don't like the mainstream media it ain't no skin off my back, and I guess I really don't care why.

Originally Posted by Kiff 1961

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

What Air America was intended to do was reach a matching liberal audience, and it's failing in part because that matching semi-casual liberal auidence is already listening to NPR and watch CBS and ABC and CNN.

If you check out some of the lefty blogs, you'll find a fair level of dissatisfaction with the "so-called liberal media."

Air America is unabashedly pro-liberal in its approach, unlike those other networks which at least need to have the appearance of being balanced. As I've said before, up to this point there hadn't been any lefty equivalent of Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity on the air. Now there's Al Franken and Randi Rhodes.

Ms. Rhodes did have a regional base (in Florida, I believe) before going national on Air America.

Right now I can't hear AA in my car anymore on the way to and from work since the deal with the Chicago station fell apart :-(, but when I'm at home I can listen to the streaming audio, which comes in loud and clear.

As to whether AA is "failing" or not -- well, I'd say it is struggling, but it hasn't failed yet.

It's on the razor's edge of failure.

LA and Chicago Stations Gone

Air America Bounces Check

Violence Threatened in Air America/Multicultural dispute

Off, then On, Now Back Off

But they're apparently aware of the need to gain a new revenue stream, and double-pronto:

Thong Undies For Air America :lol:

For some of this, you'll have to make do with the Drudge summary, the original stories to which he links are often gone now.

But in all seriousness, Air America has been sinking fast almost from the day they started. The audience they hoped for just wasn't there, and they tried to immitate what they mistakenly thought make Limbaugh and Hannity successful, demonstrating in the process their near-total lack of comprehension of the source and nature of that success.

The lack of understanding was demonstrated again a few weeks ago, when the Chairman and vice-Chairman of Air America resigned (after whole weeks on the job). The former program director stepped down days earlier, having given a speech in which he said, more or less, that the problem was that the radio audience isn't intelligent enough to appreciate liberal thinking. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Limbaugh is far more thoughtful and analytical, under the bombast and superficially juvenile humor, than Al Franken is capable of being. Anchoring their network on Al Franken was simply foolish, he's the equivalent, not of Limbaugh, but of Ann Coulter on a bad day. Sean Hannity, though almost identical to Limbaugh in political views, takes a different tack as a host, with far less bombast and far more 'nice kid next door' tone. It's different, but quite effective as broadcasting.

The people who run Air America made the exact same mistake that CNN keeps making as they try to counterprogram against Fox: they believe that the key to the right-wing media success is sensationalism, bombast, and the assumption that the audience is not very bright.

The audience is quite bright enough to perceive this assumption on their part. :twisted: :lol:

Originally Posted by Justin '77

One thing to point out from Boortz's column:

The prison abuse scandal can damage Bush, the Nick Berg story can only help him.

:shock: :shock: :shock:

From a coldly political POV, that's the simple truth. Which is why the Berg story has vanished off the traditional media, while Abu Ghraib gets endless airtime. We're in a Presidential election year, and it's late May. From here to November, everything has a political side.

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Originally Posted by Justin '77

One thing to point out from Boortz's column:

The prison abuse scandal can damage Bush, the Nick Berg story can only help him.

:shock: :shock: :shock:

From a coldly political POV, that's the simple truth. Which is why the Berg story has vanished off the traditional media, while Abu Ghraib gets endless airtime.

oh, that's why.... of course it has nothing to do with nick berg's beheading being not terribly surprising; that it's even nearly happened before with daniel pearl (sp?); that, while it's a vile act, vile acts are what you would expect "evil-doers" to commit, and so there's no real news there.

no, no.... it's a vast left-wing conspiracy.


TK

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Originally Posted by Justin '77

One thing to point out from Boortz's column:

The prison abuse scandal can damage Bush, the Nick Berg story can only help him.

:shock: :shock: :shock:

From a coldly political POV, that's the simple truth. Which is why the Berg story has vanished off the traditional media, while Abu Ghraib gets endless airtime. We're in a Presidential election year, and it's late May. From here to November, everything has a political side.

Yes it's true, everything is political. But I offer this in defense of the media - the Nic Berg story doesn't have a lot of gas to run on. He got his head chopped off - we were all shocked, he got buried, etc etc.
There is still some life left in the story - the Doonesbury apology for example - but it has no place to go.
The Abu Ghraib prison piece has generated traditional news - trials and courtmartials, not to mention more, perhaps even more disturbing photos.
It just creates more news and will continue to do so. It's a story people are interested in, and with all the hearings associated with it, will continue to produce easily reportable news. Since nobody can tell Nic Berg's killers apart, nor pronounce their names, and probably feels like if they get caught, there'll just be more psychopaths out there to chop of people's heads regardless - the whole idea of justice and process just vanishes.
With Chuck and Lynndie - we know what they look like, and they are as American as the Jerry Springer Show.

Originally Posted by TrollKing

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Originally Posted by Justin '77

One thing to point out from Boortz's column:

The prison abuse scandal can damage Bush, the Nick Berg story can only help him.

:shock: :shock: :shock:

From a coldly political POV, that's the simple truth. Which is why the Berg story has vanished off the traditional media, while Abu Ghraib gets endless airtime.

oh, that's why.... of course it has nothing to do with nick berg's beheading being not terribly surprising; that it's even nearly happened before with daniel pearl (sp?); that, while it's a vile act, vile acts are what you would expect "evil-doers" to commit, and so there's no real news there.

no, no.... it's a vast left-wing conspiracy.


TK

Conspiracy? No. A preference by the traditional media generally for stories that are negative about Bush, the American military, and the Iraq effort? Bank on it.

As for the Berg story, it's of a piece with the rest of the horrors that we ended by the invasion, which the press simply don't want to deal with.

The Abu Ghraib story is, from a purely journalistic point of view, essentially told. The story of the courts-martial is yet to finish, but the endless stream of pictures serves little purpose other than political.

It's the same thing we saw during Bush's last press conference a few weeks ago. He did a so-so job of his basic statement, then took questions. Essentially every question was a call for an apology or a demand to know where he thought he had screwed up. Out of all the things they could have ask (and he left some good hooks they could have tapped in the things he glossed over or tried to slide past), all they were concerned with was apology/admission of error.

No questions about the cost of the war, no questions about the next step in power transfer, no questions about the fate of Hussein, nothing about anything of substance.

The reason, of course, was that they hoped to give Kerry a sound bite to use, and to impress other media types at having 'gotten' an admission of guilt, more or less, as they saw it.

Originally Posted by Amanda W.

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Originally Posted by Justin '77

One thing to point out from Boortz's column:

The prison abuse scandal can damage Bush, the Nick Berg story can only help him.

:shock: :shock: :shock:

From a coldly political POV, that's the simple truth. Which is why the Berg story has vanished off the traditional media, while Abu Ghraib gets endless airtime. We're in a Presidential election year, and it's late May. From here to November, everything has a political side.

The Abu Ghraib prison piece has generated traditional news - trials and courtmartials, not to mention more, perhaps even more disturbing photos.

The story is told. The photos were all taken last year, the only question is how many exist, and how bad the abuses were. It's already been essentially established that they weren't to the level of true torture in most cases, certainly nothing like the level of what Hussein did routinely, yet our press simply buries that inconvenient fact to the degree they can, and treats the bizarre statements of people like Teddy Kennedy as if they were credible.

Even now, they still keep striving to imply that it's a vast, systemic problem, more out of forlorn hope than conviction. Two weeks ago, they thought they finally had Bush, Rumsfeld, and the military where they wanted them.

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Conspiracy? No. A preference by the traditional media generally for stories that are negative about Bush, the American military, and the Iraq effort?

you say tomato....

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

As for the Berg story, it's of a piece with the rest of the horrors that we ended by the invasion....

oh, it's ended, is it?


TK

Originally Posted by TrollKing

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Conspiracy? No. A preference by the traditional media generally for stories that are negative about Bush, the American military, and the Iraq effort?

you say tomato....

The word 'conspiracy' implies deliberate planning, and I don't think that's the case. Instead, it's more of a matter of a single liberal culture that permeates most quarters of the traditional media, so they tend to have similar reactions to a given event or action.

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

As for the Berg story, it's of a piece with the rest of the horrors that we ended by the invasion....

oh, it's ended, is it?


TK

As far as the events covered by the story go, as far as anyone has been able to find out that's apparently the case. The initial worst instances turned out to be faked, and the rest, though bad enough, isn't as bad as the press is trying to spin it.

The story itself isn't over because the press won't let it be over.

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

As far as the events covered by the story go, as far as anyone has been able to find out that's apparently the case. The initial worst instances turned out to be faked, and the rest, though bad enough, isn't as bad as the press is trying to spin it.

The story itself isn't over because the press won't let it be over.

they won't?

------------------------------

counts of mentions of abu ghraib on the home pages of various websites as of this moment:

cnn.com: 1 (headline-- Lawmakers clash on Iraq at hearing)

abcnews.go.com: 0

msnbc.msn.com: 1 (headline-- U.S. denies Sanchez saw abuse)

cbsnews.com: 1
headline-- Photos reveal more details of prisoner abuse
the home page also carries the headline "Berg Slaying Suspects Questioned".

------------------------------

wow, they're really playing it up.


TK

Limbaugh is far more thoughtful and analytical, under the bombast and superficially juvenile humor, than Al Franken is capable of being

As for the liberal media. What a laugh. There hasn't been a liberal media in 20 years, maybe 30. This is just one more of the lies the brownshirts shriek so they can stir up their base. Aren't they amusing when they go into automatic with their litany of lies?

That's why air america is such a blast. It is such a delight to hear the brownshirts trashed, and so amazing to hear the truth for a change.

As for "the media," they are cowed, beaten little puppies. Scared of being black balled by the brownshirts. Of course, not all of them are scared. Some are just lazy, overpaid and stupid. I am not saying this because they go easy on the brownshirts, but because they failed america after 911.

I can understand Bush and Kerry not speaking the truth about oil and the middle east, but I really cannot understand the inane drivel that passes for journalism on the subject. I used to think they were all bought, but I now know they are simply stupid and spineless. Thank God for the internet.

Hope some of you got to hear Everest on BookTV this weekend:

Oil, Power & Empire: Iraq and the U.S. Global Agenda
Larry Everest
Description: From the Commonwealth Club of California in San Francisco, Larry Everest discusses the history of American foreign policy towards Iraq and the strategic role played by oil in shaping that policy. Mr. Everest explains the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 as another step in the history of furthering U.S. imperial goals. Controlling Iraqi oil reserves, he says, gives the U.S. leverage over potential economic rivals like China and the various countries that make up the European Union. Includes Q&A.

PS I actually would have nothing against furthering our imperial goals if it meant better jobs for our workers, a more stable economy, andwe could actually pull it off. But the utter incompetence of the grandiose, narcissistic, fools in the white house have certainly made me doubt our ability to pull it off. At least as long as they are in power.

Originally Posted by jadams

Hope some of you got to hear Everest on BookTV this weekend:

BookTV? is that for real?

*shudders*


TK

Originally Posted by jadams

I can understand Bush and Kerry not speaking the truth about oil and the middle east,

No, you can't, because as you've repeatedly demonstrated, you don't know anything about either.