Blogged by Brad on the road…
Imagine if the reporting at The BRAD BLOG was as wrong as often and consistently as the entire swath of the Rightwing Blogosphere. We’d be marginalized and completely ignored by every legitimate mainstream media outlet…even more than we are now. And we’re almost never wrong. But in those rare occassions where we are, we’re eager to admit it. Prominently.
We’re not talking about the small potatoes on the wingnut side, either. We’re talking about the most prominent of them, from DRUDGE to Malkin to Power Line to the entire plethora of echo monkeys in the wrong after wrong after wrong wingnut ‘sphere.
And yet, despite their consistent record of getting the story wrong, time after time after time, they continue to be referenced as “news” sources by the MSM — that supposed “liberal media” — nonetheless.
“In the last month National Public Radio, MSNBC, Bloomberg Radio, Fox News, CNN, and CNBC have all (foolishly) cited the Drudge Report as a source or an on-air reference to support a particular story,” Eric Boehlert reported at Media Matters on Tuesday. “Yet all of them turned away last week when Drudge smeared a well-known journalist with a lie. And here’s 10 bucks that says those very same news outlets in coming weeks will go back to citing Drudge items,” he predicts, in what would be a sucker’s bet for anyone to take.
Boehlert’s latest report is long overdue. Not that any of it will get the attention that the now-discredited wingnut reports did, as he details, following last week’s monkey-echoed (and completely wrong) debacle, claiming that a CNN reporter had “heckled” John McCain at a Baghdad press conference.
But when Drudge made up a story about a CNN reporter, the Post played dumb.
Boehlert is dead right, of course. And while his report details one instance after another of high-profile wingnuts making absolute asses of themselves, and failing to correct in most cases or apologize in all cases, it’s the corporate mainstream “liberal” media who continue to help perpetuate this sort of bullshit by both reporting it as “news” and failing to expose it as garbage when it’s found to be wrong. As it usually is.
Meanwhile, the same MSM fail to cover even a fraction of the news reported from the Progressive ‘sphere, despite the fact that it’s consistently correct.
As Boehlert details:
And as the Ware attack illustrated, left to their own woefully inadequate ethical standards, warbloggers have almost no interest in acknowledging their sloppy errors or expressing regret for the harm those errors cause.
Read his report and be appalled.
Beyond that, let us know if you have any ideas on how we could get away with being so wrong, so often, and still become so popular. It would save us a helluva lot of time. And we could use the money.
I heard McCain on the Hannity show THIS WEEK still claiming that story about the CNN reporter!
McCain said to Hannity, “Thanks, Sean, for all that you do.” IE: Don’t vote for McCain!
Being consistently wrong and not admitting it is not all its cracked up to be Brad.
Ask Cheney/Bush.
“Ask Cheney/Bush.”
Why bother? They will just lie to you again like they have always done in the past.
I. T. M. F. A. . . .
An interesting aspect of Leftist blogs is the habit of censorship and suppression of dissident voices. If you don’t tow the leftist line then your comments don’t belong.
I have commented on numerous progressive, liberal and leftist blogs only to find my comments deleted and accounts locked out. I have received threatening emails warning me to stay off of their blogs.
This Maoist/Leninist-Gramsci-like behavior is mighty”¦ Leftist. I can accept inaccuracy in someone’s freedom of speech long before the suppression of that speech anyday”¦
What I typically see on leftist blogs is a bunch of weird names, strange signature lines, ugly sarcasm and disturbingly incoherent comments. Ever spent much time in kos land?
Maybe this site is different”¦ maybe my comments will actually stick around? Maybe I will find some dialog? I have hoped for that on many occasions only to be rabidly attacked and threatened and censored by loyal leftists”¦
Something that I find interesting here is this self-delusion on behalf of the left that the MSM is right-wing biased. During the past 30 years until recently, until the advent of the bloggophere it was generally accepted by most people both on the right and the left that the majority of the MSM was very liberal indeed. It still is”¦
The funny thing is that the MSM knows that the right knows that they (the MSM) are liberal-biased. By attacking the MSM the left are attacking their #1 source of leftist support. However, possibly because in the bloggophere all of the fringe left wingers are prominent, the MSM is not far enough left for them”¦ I believe that is an accurate conclusion. The MSM is actually too middle ground for the far leftist moonbats out here in blog land”¦-
Your thoughts? Have a safe weekend see ya Monday!
John McCain – – – Prisoner of war!
Yeah, right!
MY ASS!
Prove it McCain, or prove you didn’t get preferential treatment, you liar, (and former presidential candidate), with a bullet proof vest.
Let’s not forget the people who have really, REALLY been hurt by this Don Imus debacle…
WHORES!
Yes, Whores!
Those, largely uncompensated, alienated, debased, accused, harassed, abused, and even murdered…
But even worse…
endlessly and infinitely referred to as the last definable dredge of CIVIL SOCIETY ITSELF.
The Whores.
The media…
Supply and demand 🙁
{Ed note: The respectful term is “working girls”, Larry. –99}
GregMC asked (after noting that “leftist blogs” remove his comments, without naming which ones, and failing to note that most “rightist blogs” don’t even allow comments, or if they do, they have to be approved first)
Wow. Talk about “self-delusion”. You just made your own case for it!
“accepted by most people…that majority of the MSM very very liberal” is hardly evidence of anything. Indeed, it was also “accepted by most people” that the Iraq War was a good idea, until evidence showed that it wasn’t.
Now I have evidence (empirical, not anectodal or opinion-based) to show that the MSM leans right. Here are just two examples:
— “If It’s Sunday, It’s Conservative”
— “If It’s Sunday, It’s Still Conservative”
So where is your evidence? (And here’s a hint, a Pew study which demonstrates that a majority of reporters identify as either moderate or liberal, does not equate with what they report…) So please show us your empirical evidence to suggest that the MSM is “very liberal indeed”.
If you’re unable to, one might come to see your assertion as “self-delusional”.
(P.S. Avoid personal attacks on other commenters, or using different names when posting and avoid known disinformation, and your posts will stay here — unmoderated — just fine)
GregMC #5, #6
What is your occupation, education, and upbringing?
Are you or have you ever been a member of the … 🙂 just kidding.
BTW you may not realize it, but you come across as very biased. So it could be difficult to have a discussion with you since you seem to be set hard in your way to the point of rejecting valid debate.
One thing scholars do in a position paper, is first expose their own bias so the readers can factor that in when evaluating the work of that scholar.
For instance, The American Religion is a book written by a Jewish Gnostic. He points this out in the preface, etc., and how he is able to overcome his background and write an unbiased account as well as anyone.
What impressed me about his work (I read it a decade ago) was that he notices that there is no yardstick from which to measure and do religious criticism, like there is when doing literary criticism. He is well known and respected for his excellent literary criticism (I trust that you understand “criticism” in the scholarly sense is not “put down”).
I would note that your posts here do not give any indication that you have a grasp of any way to determine what is left, middle, or right in the sense of scholarly criticism.
The effect of your usage of these words does no more than juxtaposition them from some other position, like “thirty feet from the middle dune” in some group of desert sand dunes. When the wind blows every dune moves to a new GPS position, yet “thirty feet from the middle dune” is still a valid term … it is just not the same actual location anymore.
The statement “he is left of Wolfowitz” could brand even a right winger as a lefty in some circumstances. I trust that you can see that such rhetoric is rubbish, because it is not attached to a firm foundation of standardized critical principles.
In your posts, in place of valid criticism you use put down, demonization, and group think type rhetoric. We have seen this come and go time and time again here.
And as Brad pointed out, your concepts about the MSM so far are seemingly contrived. All this leads me to expect that your stay here will not be as fruitful as it could have been in a bona fide and fair minded dialogue.
I went to your site and read a post there containing:
Which seems to indicate that you understand some things (“you are left of Wolfowitz”) but your posts seem to indicate that it is your application of your knowledge that is holding you back.
Nevertheless welcome aboard this proud lefty, middley, and righty blog where you don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
#6 gregmc
My “self-delusional” thoughts:
The MSM and the right wing “moonbats” have long claimed that the MSM has had a “liberal” bias. That part of your evaluation is correct. But, did you ever bother to ask yourself why this is so or do just take on faith every lie that they tell you? Anybody who takes of faith the complete nonsense the likes of Rush Limbaugh put out is labeled a “conservative” by the likes of Rush Limbaugh. If you accept the preceding definition then “conservatives” are those who do not have the brain power to do any reasoning for themselves. Clueless idiots all qualify as “conservatives” by this definition. Rush Limbaugh and company always label anybody who does not fall for the complete nonsense they push as “liberals” and other derogatory terms. This is done to attempt to enhance the effect of any of the illogical claims they chose to make. Any thinking person (any “liberal”) can easily conclude that their terminology leaves “liberals” as the class of people who have any ability to do any thinking form themselves. If you like to be thought of as a good thinker you very clearly should take it as a complement when the likes of Limbaugh call you a “liberal”! The same can be said about “left-winger” and many other of the derogatory terms the likes of Limbaugh often substitute for “liberal” when distributing their senseless babble.
If you ever do bother to ask yourself why the MSM claims the bias they do the results should be determined as follows:
Would the MSM really claim to have a bias that would limit their own believability or would they prefer to claim a bias that would tend to enhance the bias of those they serve in favor of the propaganda they are feeding them? If the “pundits” who collectively make up the MSM have been thinking the least bit logically all along it is a very safe bet that they would prefer the later. Therefore, to take the nonsense they feed you at face value is not a very logical idea. It leaves “conservatives” (the clueless) totally clueless to the fact that they wind up living in any nonexistent fantasy world those “pundits” choose to create for them.
So, is the successful twisting of the Imus thing, into bashing blacks, over yet? Just wondering…
The corporate fascist rightwing echo chamber driving the talking points in the CMSM still powerful and working.
Today, in my local yocal paper, a syndicated article about how blacks should clean up their act with rap, comedy, etc…
Imus making racist remarks about a black woman’s basketball team, has successfully been twisted in the CMSM into “blacks should clean up their act”.
We have a hatefest in the CMSM, still going on today as proven in my local newspaper, for: Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Dave Chappelle, all rap stars, the women on the Rutgers basketball team should be ashamed because they went off and listened to “Timbaland” right after they met with Imus (even though there is no evidence for this), etc…etc…etc…blah…blah…blah…blah…
Yes, BLACKS SHOULD CLEAN UP THEIR ACT…BECAUSE IMUS SAID RACIALLY INTOLERANT STATEMENTS!!!
DO YOU FOLLOW THE LOGIC THERE? RIGHT?
I’d like to thank Limbaugh, Hannity, and all their FAKE black callers, the FAKE black rightwing websites that I linked you too, and last but not least, the Corporate Mainstream Media, who ALWAYS uses faulty RIGHTWING website talking points like Drudge, etc…and NEVER the more accurate progressive websites that are nearly 100% accurate!!!!!!!!!
It’s STILL going on, pay attention!!!
Your typical syndicated corporate fascist rightwing headline talking point, sent to newspapers across the country:
“””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
Imus isn’t the real bad guy
Instead of wasting time on irrelevant shock jock, black leaders need to be fighting a growing gangster culture.
“”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
Black shill callers (if they’re really black) on Limbaugh and Hannity ALWAYS announce they’re black: “Sean, I’m a black guy, and……….”
That’s what you do, when your racist white audience needs to be “sold” that “even blacks hate Sharpton and Jackson”. What good would it do, if they fake shill black callers didn’t announce first, “Sean, I’m black, and I hate Sharpton and Jackson, too!”??????
Then, it would just be another WHITE Limbaugh and Hannity caller, announcing they hate Sharpton and Jackson. But it’s NOT RACIST, if you get a shill fake black caller, who must announce they’re black first, bashing other blacks.
WILL SOMEONE PLEASE EXPOSE THE SHILL BLACK CALLERS, WHO CALL INTO LIMBAUGH AND HANNITY, PLEASE????????????
Brad, you know more than anyone about their tactics: ACVR “Thor” Hearne’s FAKE voters’ rights group.
Brad, would you put it past them to be doing this? Not a stretch by any means, right Brad?
“Warblogger” is a code word for “hard werkers” at Fox “news” or for those who draft legislation in the what house:
(SCOTUS Blog, emphasis added). So when they do illegal spying on Americans or anything else, generalisimo Gonzales can move it to the secret court.
I can hear the judiciary committee laughing out loud at this proposal already!
The warbloggers, inspired by the mother of all neoCons, want to spread their “beautiful mind” to Iraq thru “beautiful killing”, “beautiful maiming”, and “beautiful oil taking”.
All the while drinking the “beautiful kool aid” made from the sugars of booty and the waters of delusion.
DREDD
Outstanding and thank you very much. I am very new to the entire realm of political and social debate. I have been blogging for almost a year now and my education in these matters is borne entirely of self sought knowledge, nothing formal yet. Prior to my awakening I just never had an interest. (norm)?
Since you asked and I certainly respect your response to me here are the answers to your questions.
Occupation: I am a supervisor in a Dental Insurance call center.
Education: Some college. Extensive education in military intel. I served 10 years as an electronic warfare tech. 5 on ship and 4 instructing ops.
Upbringing: Started out rough, trailer parks but, we were not trash. Just a young family starting out. We moved frequently through my childhood living lower-middle class depending on the banking job my father landed. We finally settled in Colorado where both of my parents landed that dream job. My mom executive vice pres/compliance officer and my father chairman of the board and president of the bank. That all happened just before I left for the Navy so I didn’t get a taste of that rich life ;o)
I may be incorrect on my declaration that the MSM is liberal biased. I don’t watch cable news. Hell, I don’t even have cable TV so no, I am not a Fox fan. Nor do I listen to Rush. I get most of my news info through discriminating research on the web or AM radio (conservative stations Prager, Medved, Hewitt and Savage predominantly). Please don’t think I am a blind follower though. Due to the nature of my military rate, I am intimately familiar with psychological warfare techniques. I trust little of what I read or what someone else tells me. I prefer to think for myself thank you.
If you were actually interested to read all of that then”¦ well. I graciously accept your welcome and I look forward to learning.
GregMC #19
Thank you for your considered and personal response. I feel like I know you better now. It reminds me of the psy warrior site I visit sometimes.
I have expressed concern about the institutionalization of deceit in our society often times on this blog.
I think we need to reject the notion that we can make up reality if we have enough power to persuade, and embrace reasonable facts instead.
What do you think on that issue?
Facts are important of course. I am discovering that in this digital information age that they can be hard to come by… The fabrication and dissemination of misinformation is RAMPANT on the internet. It’s getting hard for a discerning researcher such as myself to tell the difference. It’s going to freaking get us all killed and not for the reasons which you suspect I can probably safely assume.
I may not be back to this entry for further comments. I invite you to email me at gregmc33@gmail.com for further discussion.
Farewell GregMC …