Well, alrighty then.

[sisyphusshrugged]

Peter Daou on the Coulter thing

I posed a rhetorical challenge to the media yesterday and I'll repeat it here:

"While major media figures and media outlets dizzy themselves trying to rebut factual critiques from the left and to justify unjustifiable reporting, herds of rightwingers wantonly slander them.... This kind of assault on the free press is par for the course on the right. And unlike Democrats, Republicans at the highest levels willingly go after the media. For once, I'd like to see journalists rise in indignation and fury. For once, I'd like to know if the targets of this abuse have the pride and dignity to reject it, to stand up for their profession and their personal integrity. If the same attacks were directed toward any other profession or professional, the response would be overwhelming. Why do reporters take it lying down?

I challenge establishment journalists to stand up to the rightwing smear machine and condemn the maligning of their patriotism and of their values."

Really though, I should know better. Not only will these media clowns refuse to defend themselves against rightwing slander, they will eagerly give those slanderers a platform to spread their smut.

and the House that Murrow Built on the Coulter thing

After her “Today” appearance generated so much attention, Coulter became the most-searched topic on Technorati. As of today, “Godless” has moved up to No. 3 on Amazon’s list of best-sellers. All this attention is sure to keep her speaking fees -- already listed as up to $60,000 a pop – in the upper stratosphere. Hmmm, think maybe she knows exactly what kind of reaction she wants?

It can, and has, been argued that news shows like “Today” should not give Coulter a forum from which to launch her vitriolic and attention-grabbing attacks. I’m not sure I completely agree with that. The media as a whole – all of us – certainly shoulder some of the blame for providing “provocative” and “passionate” points of view that in reality cross a line here or there. But, just as the press does not get to select the leaders it covers, neither do they get to select the figures impacting our culture and debate – whether it’s Coulter or Michael Moore.

While some may want to say the attention given to Coulter illustrates some failure of our free press, it probably is much more an indicator of the audience itself. The fact that an attack on widows of 9/11 could help sell books is not a function of Coulter’s appearance on a network morning show. It’s an indictment of the state of discourse today. Shrillness sells, invective rewarded and “snark” is celebrated – on all sides. It just doesn’t pay to be civil (or maybe even sane) anymore.

It's worth noting that the CBS blog's abbreviated blogroll "balances" Crooks and Liars, Kos and TPM with Michelle Malkin, Captain's Quarters and Powerline, and apparently at one point LGF was in the mix too.

and how did they choose those sites?

In all, this list in intended to help folks stay informed about issues surrounding the media, news and events that impact the news business and opinions and criticisms of it as well as present a sampling of opinion that is helping to shape the public discourse. It may not always look the same, but will always seek to present a fairly balanced mix. With this list, we’ve tried to do something that is sometimes taboo in the blogosphere – edit.

Sounds as if the press does get to select the figures "impacting" (does it amaze you to hear that this guy has spent a good chunk of his career producing for and appearing on Fox? Once he left Pat Buchanan, of course) our culture and debate sometimes.

"It just doesn’t pay to be civil (or maybe even sane) anymore," Mr. Ververs says.

I presume Mr. Ververs is getting paid.

Comments

here's the class assignment for everyone who reads your blog.

[xgray.livejournal.com]

sometime during the next week, watch some professional wrestling on tv...raw, smackdown, etc. (check your local listings)

do it! it's actually more fun than it sounds. but more to the point, it's educational. "how's that?" you ask.

it's simple, really.

professional wrestling, or as it's known "officially", sports entertainment has a lot more in common with main-stream-media than you'd expect.

professional wrestlers are not athletes. sure, they may look like athletes (may, that is), act like athletes and fans may think of them as athletes, but they're really just entertainers (and some are very good enterainers at that). in their world whether you're a "good guy" or a "bad guy" doesn't matter to the front office. all that matters is your ability, as an entertainer, to get a reaction from the crowd. the bigger the better.

is this starting to make sense now? sound familiar?

so when the main-stream-media fails to act like journalists, don't be so surprised. they're not actually journalist. sure, they may look like journalist and act like journalists (sometimes), but they're not. in reality they're just news entertainers. that's all they are, competing entertainers all trying get the biggest reaction from the crowd.

I can't stand it when Coulter is compared to Moore

[(Anonymous)]

or anyone on the left. There is no equivalent to Coulter on the left. That's the whole point of the debate.