Archive for journalists

Thursday Links

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

 

Photo: theguardian.com

Photo: theguardian.com

Pete Seeger Testimony Before HUAC - the House Unamerican Activities Committee - on August 18, 1955

Atlanta: Snow, Ice, Sand Send South's Flagship City Reeling (AP)

Excellent news!
BP Deepwater Supervisors Must Face Manslaughter Rep!

Terror Suspect Challenges NSA Surveillance Program

This is very serious:
Egypt to Put 20 Al-Jazeera Journalists on Trial

When 100,000 people sign a petition for you to be deported (from the US - petitioning the White House), don't you rethink your behavior? Apparently Justin Bieber doesn't: he just got arrested in Canada for assaulting a limo driver.
Justin Bieber Charged with Assault

US deep South snow storm maroons motorists

Movement Seen in Talks Over Syria, Despite Gap

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Is Debunking Lies A Journalist's Job?

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Chuck Todd

Recently MSNBC's Chuck Todd has been taking some vociferous heat for a comment he made last week on Morning Joe. A NATIONAL JOURNAL article on this entitled 'Liberals Turn On Liberal Media' included this assessment of the event:

Todd said it's not the media's job to correct Republican misinformation about the Affordable Care Act. Liberals don't agree, and, where members of this crowd would usually focus their attacks on "lies" spread by Fox News or various right-wing personalities, Todd's comment had them turning on a mainstream pundit.

Two issues come to the fore as I read this. First, Chuck Todd is no more a liberal than Joe Scarborough. They're both on MSNBC but that's not saying they're liberal. One of the nice things about that organization is they have people with all degrees of political backgrounds there to share many different views. Chuck's bend isn't as right at Joe S's, perhaps, but he's no Ed Schultz or Reverend Al.

Now to the second issue: if by pundit, the National Journal means a talking head, and not much more, then okay. Chucky boy is a talking head. But he's not a journalist by any stream of thinking.

Oh, he carries a vaunted title: Chief White House Correspondent for NBC News. But that's pretty much a title and position by default. He's a talented trained parrot who repeats what he's told, but is generally devoid of independent thought. Give Polly his cracker and he'll say what he's just heard.

parrot

Todd is really a statistician who got promoted to his current position by default. He replaced David Gregory when DG moved into the MEET THE PRESS seat sadly and untimely vacant by the loss of Tim Russert. It was a domino game and Todd was very affable, relatively well-liked and there was an opening. When Gregory moved into the MTP chair, and Savannah Guthrie was better versed in legal affairs, so NBC chose the numbers man Todd, by natural progression. He wasn't groomed for the job but was as  good a choice as any if they were going to promote from within.

A scant few years ago, he was the go-to-guy for polling statistics, for MSNBC. The closest he got to the White House was the tour or standing outside the fence as he shared the latest polling news on McCain-Palin in Cleveland. He opined and crunched numbers -- not a bad background for understanding trends. But certainly not a journalist position. His fact-finding was minimal -- he received polling information,verified its source and passed it on. But he looked good, knew where to point to when they put up a chart or graph and seemed genuine doing so. He even flashed a periodic sense of humor, endearing himself to NBC viewers, myself included.

But things have a way of catching up to you. It seems his lack of journalistic integrity has come to light with his recent comments and the liberals, as they do with anyone they think is not doing an honest (possibly read, 'liberal') job, hold their feet to the fire. Todd just happens to have made a major gaff which further dings his credibility.

IT IS THE MEDIA'S JOB TO CORRECT MISINFORMATION.

If that's not job one, then it's a close 'job two' -- 'one' being getting honest/unbiased news to the people.

Now to be fair, Todd did issue a response to the criticism, reported here on MEDIATE:

Chuck tweeted“Somebody decided to troll w/mislding headline: point I actually made was folks shouldn’t expect media to do job WH has FAILED to do re: ACA.”

That sounds like a bit of the blame game, usually reserved for guilty people or the right-wing press. A braver stand might have been, "I misspoke." That would have been simpler, more honest and this would have been over.

But Chuck didn't leave it there. He continued his twitter defense:

Chuck Todd Tweet

Blame the White House. Hey, Chuck, you're the Chief White House Correspondent. Don't you think you have some responsibility?

If you read this far, I'm confident you're saying to yourself that I don't care for Chuck. Actually, just the opposite is true. I find him much less annoying that most. His politics are a bit right of center for my comfort. At MSNBC, few besides Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnell and the good Rev Al will hit agreeable chords with me more often than them. But I still like listening to Chuck, when he's not whining. He does that too much and he's oftentimes offering up his personal thoughts, feelings and intuition which lately haven't proven to have a batting average much above the infamous "Mendoza line." But I'm glad NBC has him.

Over time, I hope he'll learn that it's better to fill the air with honesty, investigative information and valid insights -- and that he'll assume a journalist's integrity role for finding and correcting misinformation. If not, there's another presidential election coming up in 2016 which means in just over a year, NBC is going to need a numbers cruncher and perhaps someone a bit more responsible will cover the White House and Chuck can go back to his numbers board. He sure was competent there.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Bonus Cartoon of the Day- GOP Loves The Media... Now

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

gopmedia

Nate Beeler

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Cartoons of the Day- Scandals Part Two

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

scandals

David Horsey

scandals1

Mike Smith

scandals2

Bill Day

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Video- Oklahoma Tornado Survivor Finds Missing Dog During Live Interview

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

I'm with the folks at Gawker, WTF is wrong with the journalists? They couldn't have given the woman some help pulling her dog out? It ended well, but they're still asshats.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Video- The Daily Show: The Road to the Road to the Road to the White House

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare
FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Romney Ignores Questions from American Press In U.K.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Is Mittens deliberately trying to alienate the press? Could be yummy. Via Taegan-

At a press conference in London this morning, First Read notes that Mitt Romney answered questions from British reporters but did not take any questions from the American reporters, "which isn't protocol."

"In fact, it's considered a bit of an insult to the U.S reporters who are following the presumptive GOP presidential nominee overseas. Even bringing this up will lead some to say, 'There goes the media, whining again.' But folks, those of us that have traveled overseas and been involved in these VERY limited press avails have rarely seen heads of democracies TOTALLY ignore their own press corps but answer ANOTHER press corps' questions. Sure, it would have looked REALLY bad had Romney ignored the U.K. questions. But is the campaign so intent on limiting media access that the candidate won't call an audible when standing next to a leader from another country who DOES want to take questions?"

"This is a bipartisan challenge for the press corps. Every president in the modern era has decided to pick up on some aspect of limiting media access to the president from their predecessor. The public never cares, because most of them distrust at least half of the press corps. But folks, it's a slippery slope."

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare