HOW NOT TO DO IT . . . S.J. Hedges of Chi Trib Wash. bureau talked to two people for his 7/23/06 story about how Bush admin. lost Syria. (Successor to the 40s “who lost China?” problem?) One was a former Pentagon Middle East aide who he says pushed a hard line on Syria and now is at a think tank, Wash. Institute for Near East Policy. The other is Syria’s aambassador to U.S.
Hedges also went to clips for assorted comings and goings, as what Rumsfeld said on the matter and, we presume, actions taken by a former CIA analyst who used to be “top Syrian expert” on the Bush Admin Natl Security Council, who wouldn’t return Hedges’s phone calls. So where he stood on Syria comes from someone else. Hedges does not say whom.
Bush admin. “stumbled,” say “some . . . analysts.” How many and what are their names? He cites one, plus an ambassador.
This is typical daily newspaper throwaway stuff, the reporter acting as expert. It’s how newspapers do it, and it’s part of their problem. The good bloggers, on the other hand, are tentative and thoughtful, regularly referring to others, weighing and balancing. They respect how the mind works. Their medium permits it. But the $2.50 ad-packed Trib doesn’t permit it. So people go elsewhere. How many? More every quarter, circulation figures tell us.
: . . . Chi Trib desk editor Wm. B. Rood jumped into politics with his account of his and J. Kerry’s Viet Nam war exploits, defending K. from Republican critics. an agonizing by a newsie for whom neutrality on the day’s issues is the bedrock principle of his life as a newsie.
Chi Trib man. ed. Jim O’Shea ran Rood’s account after his own agonizing period. Coming up: a full account with comparable display – “beyond words” – of the anti-Kerry side of the story! Boo.
. . . Compared to what? Something from the nation at large: . . . "foaming jerk" is Michelle Malkin's phrase for Chris Matthews, hound of the Baskervilles revisited. He asked Z Miller if he thought it would be spitballs, as he said in his speech. Editor & Publisher also considered that a good question, says ZM "fudged" but
"the unfair, unbalanced, and unhinged purveyors of journalism, or whatever it is they call what they do at MSNBC, should be ashamed."
Michelle Malkin on C. Matthews and friends after he savaged her on air – “never prouder of you, Chris,” said Keith Olbermann afterwards: “the unfair, unbalanced, and unhinged purveyors of journalism, or whatever it is they call what they do at MSNBC, should be ashamed.”
“Democrat Party waterboys in the media are in full desperation mode. I have now witnessed firsthand and up close (Matthews' spittle nearly hit me in the face) how the pressure from alternative media sources--the blogosphere, conservative Internet forums, talk radio, Regnery Publishing, FOX News, etc. --is driving these people absolutely batty.”
Olbermann suggested she was following orders from the Swift Boat Vets to “steer the Kerry-Shot-Himself flotsam into the mainstream media,” when she had been booked for the show to push a book and the producer, one Dominic Bellone, had said first they wanted to talk about Swift Vets’ accusations.
My idea is for Matthews and Bill Reilly to appear on each other’s shows. It would be a series of interruptions interrupted by interruptions. You don’t have to be Irish – a Jewish friend told me his family specialized in fingers waved in faces – but I do know an in-law or two of mine has commented on the noise my brothers and I used to make while conversing with each other. Be that as it may, a Reilly vs. Matthews card would be a sellout.
9-2-04 11:57 am
: Hearing M. Dowd: Brian Lehrman on WNYC in NYC said she looked into Bush's soul, she denied doing such a thing, then immediately began to tell what he was thinking. She is very self-revelatory, I fear.
All in all, the Dowd segment was very good. She's an entertaining speaker. A prisoner of metaphor and completely liberal. Also apparently unaware of her biases, rather her contradictions, as what I mentioned earlier, not looking into souls. She does that all the time, and extrapolates wildly. Sees white house as Addams mansion, etc. Sees Bushies as more credible in threatening to destroy terrorists, more than Edwards, for instance, but finds them "scary." Brian did not ask if there's a connection. She finds them vicious but mentions Carville without reference to his tactics. Kerry knew bush would try to "rip his throat out." Yuck. Endorses all homophobia suspicions. A very good look at what's said at parties I'm not invited to. Not to say I'm invited to any.
Add the "subtext" readings. Speaks of "don't put me on couch" comments by Bush sr. and her analyzing W as trying to one-up his father but claiming it's what anyone would conclude.
And from Lynne Cheney's saying Dick did not do the twist (a 50s thing) to condemnation of 60s. This is thinking?