I haven’t been posting because I’m in the heartland, taking care of my elderly parents. And, as we all know from the Times, we don’t do anything here except vote for a bigot for President every four years.
Today I was fetching the newspaper (yes, on real paper, old people still read it that way), and the front page story was from a local journalist who apparently writes a weekly column about his experiences. This one explained that he doesn’t join local organizations so he can retain his “objectivity”.
Perhaps we can quibble with this use of the term, but I’d say that he used “objectivity” in a sentence much better than the average DC journalist. “Objectivity” isn’t some kind of balancing act where saying the same amount of the same kinds of words about either side of an issue magically balances a heavenly scale that keeps track of some abstract and useless notion of fairness. Instead, a big part of good journalism (“objective” or otherwise) is not becoming involved with your sources.
The journalist in the local paper understand that it’s a problem if your covering the White House and Cindy McCain praises you as a journalist but above all, a friend. Kelly O’Donnell apparently doesn’t understand something that’s obvious to a heartland goober.
Make friends with your neighbors, keep in touch with old school mates, but don’t buddy up with the people you cover. Why is that so god damned hard?
Wakeshift
Great point.
Great post.
How do we make them hear and understand?
laura
@Wakeshift: I.F. Stone would be a good place to start. He called bs on access journalism long, long ago.
Neldob
We can write emails and letters to the people and papers, etc, that are involved. Also watch Samantha bee?
rikyrah
Katherine Miller (@katherinemiller) Tweeted:
Kamala Harris touching tonight on the Midwest electability conversation often leaving out black voters, who are pretty important especially in the context of the narrow losses Dems saw in 2016 https://t.co/S134RwNqna https://twitter.com/katherinemiller/status/1125223185505370114?s=17
Ohio Mom
@laura: My college freshman seminar prof showed us a short on I.F. Stone. Up to then, I had no idea who he was but boy did that film make an impression.
I can still see in my mind’s eye Stone in an office full of huge sloppy piles of newspaper clippings (nowadays some would uncharitably call him a hoarder), protesting something along the lines of, “How can the Times say no one knew about this, they reported on this six months ago on page 24!”
As he was scolding the paper’s editors, he was pulling out the exact clipping out of a pile.
I have scoured the middle and back pages of the paper ever since.
Thanks for triggering that happy memory.
dr. bloor
It would be helpful if media folk stopped fetishizing “objectivity” and overvaluing “access,” and just reminded themselves that journalism is first and foremost adversarial in nature. Approach everything like someone’s going to piss on your leg and tell you it’s raining, and the rest (mostly) takes care of itself.
Betty Cracker
Good question. Access “journalism” may have started the Beltway press problem, but the rot now goes far beyond the issue of personal relationships. The Post fact checker Glenn Kessler provides a handy example today with an analysis entitled “What’s the evidence for ‘spying’ on Trump’s campaign? Here’s your guide.” Aside from the use of scare-quotes around “spying,” the article treats Trump’s ridiculous claim that the REAL scandal is that Democrats spied on his campaign seriously, which is a cardinal failure that renders the rest of the content meaningless.
Working the refs is rarely a waste of time, IMO, but we may have to just accept that Republicans have captured mainstream political coverage in the U.S. The Fourth Estate has had a few years now to adjust to covering a corrupt, dangerous pathological liar and demagogue, first as a major party candidate, now as POTUS. It has failed. Now we get to see if democracy can survive without it.
The Dangerman
I generally don’t give a shit about all things Royal, but can we convince Harry and Meghan that Prince Barack would be an awesome name?
Donald might stroke out (he says with a smile on his virtual face).
Doug R
Sometimes access journalism is better than nothing. Embeds in the armed forces for example. Some of the story is told, but we have to realize the limitations-I seem to recall the disclaimers were more front and center in the old days.
SiubhanDuinne
@laura:
Which reminds me, whatever happened to Aimai? Haven’t seen her around these parts in forever.
Dorothy A. Winsor
@Betty Cracker: The coverage of Barr’s letter was startling. You could see that Mueller didn’t clear Trump even in the few words Barr quoted. Yet the press reacted as if Barr was truthful.
trollhattan
@SiubhanDuinne:
She comments over at LGM. Perhaps preferring Disqus ;-)
Skepticat
I don’t think “journalism” means what most of these people think it does. I agree with Mr. Dooley; “The job of the newspaper is to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.” I have a pre-Woodward/Bernstein (unused) degree in journalism, but I no longer like to admit that.
LesGS
@SiubhanDuinne: I see her fairly frequently at Lawyers, Guns & Money.
dww44
A few years back I remember seeing an episode of Brian Lamb’s Sunday night interview series on C-Span. This was with a young woman, whose name I forget, who was writing about an issue of the day and she was talking about maintaining objectivity by making efforts not to get too familiar with the subjects. She was not a famous journalist (more of the muckraker sort, but not a flame thrower), btw, and I recollect that Brian Lamb took her to task for this. She stood her ground but he was almost mysognistic with her. Ever since, I’ve watched his interviews with a bit of a jaundiced eye
Baud
Best wishes to your parents. Hope they are doing ok.
SiubhanDuinne
@trollhattan:
@LesGS:
Thanks. I haven’t ever really followed LGM (the acronym invariably makes me think it stands for “Little Green Men”) but maybe I should start paying attention to it.
trollhattan
@SiubhanDuinne:
If you’re a connoisseur of snark (and I have my suspicions) then there can be found some very high quality examples. I joke about Disqus because it’s a love it/hate it platform, especially the comment threading.
jeffreyw
@dww44:
Was that “familiar” familiar? The nod, nod, wink, wink, familiar? Or the know stuff about it familiar. It is not at all clear.
pluky
@The Dangerman: The call is not Harry and Meghan’s. Her Majesty has final say on the naming of all royals, and even she is constrained to a fairly limited set of historical precedents.
SiubhanDuinne
@trollhattan:
Not a fan of threaded comments, but if there’s high-octane snark I might give it a try. Especially if Aimai is a regular. She’s always been a favourite.
RAM
You shouldn’t confuse objectivity with balance. In fact, most times, objectivity is the opposite of balance. When I was the editor of a weekly, we strongly discouraged any socialization with people we covered, or were likely to cover. Which was hard in a small community where everyone knows (or knows of) everyone else. When my uncle was elected village president, I took myself off that beat, but still wrote edits about village affairs. I hoped I was objective–and a number of strained family dinners suggested I wasn’t exactly failing at it. I can’t figure out why Big Media allows this level of socialization with sources–it’s a cancer on journalism. But then again, so’s Dean Baquet and nobody’s doing anything about HIM either.
SiubhanDuinne
@pluky:
Since William the Conqueror (1066), English/GB/UK monarchs have had only 13 unique names: William, Henry, Stephen, Richard, John, Edward, Mary, Elizabeth, James, Charles, Anne, George, and Victoria.
ETA: Of course, the new baby is very unlikely ever to become monarch, so there’s probably some wiggle room.
Omnes Omnibus
@SiubhanDuinne: There was a Jane for a few minutes.
J R in WV
@Ohio Mom:
My wife spent her whole career working in journalism, winding up with 30 years with The AP. She always says many of the most important stories first show up in the back of the paper, one column wide with an 18 point headline. Buried, at least at first — it’s an axiom for her.
I think this is partly because the first time something hits the news, no one knows much about it yet, and partly because it will probably embarrass someone with power when it hits the front pages.
Dr Ronnie James DO
@Betty Cracker: Journalists only provide value when they provide context, ie some kind of tether to the larger universe of facts. Otherwise they’re just holding up the megaphone. If someone like, say, John Gotti, had claimed he invented a perpetual motion machine, they’d put in necessary disclaimers like “he’s a mob boss,” “he lies a lot,””perpetual motion is a notorious theme for hoaxes,””most scientists believe perpetual motion violates the laws of physics.” They’ve stopped doing that almost completely with Trump. Maybe he’s threatening them, but so what, that’s your job. There are braver journalists in Mexico, the Phillipines, etc facing much greater physical risk and still doing the job.
SiubhanDuinne
@Omnes Omnibus:
I know, but I decided not to count the asterisks. Same reason I didn’t include Maud (Matilda).
different-church-lady
I still read it that way and I’m not a— wait… SHIT!
Amir Khalid
@SiubhanDuinne:
That is a pity. A long time ago, an Arsenal fan named his newborn son after the club’s starting XI. I would love to see a royal named after Harry’s favourite team’s starting XI.
Brachiator
@SiubhanDuinne:
There is a lot more room with respect to the names of a prince or princess. So you have had Albert, Louis, David, Alexandra and very recently Diana, etc.
Also, no King Arthur, ’cause if you are an Arthur, you best be bringing Excalibur with you. And no subsequent John because King John was such a Magna Carta sized asswipe that the name has been more or less retired. Richard would be dicey.
Edward is about the only monarch name that spans Norman and Anglo Saxon rulers.
And yes, I have too much time on my hands.
Redshift
This concept of objectivity is better than “balance,” but I still don’t think much of it. It reminds me way too much of journalists who don’t vote, or try not to have opinions on issues, because they think it allows them to be more objective. I can’t recall who it was, but there was an author or columnist I heard taking about how in his conversations with journalists who try to avoid having opinions, they often have an incredibly shallow understanding of the policy areas they cover.
Truth, not objectivity, should be the core principle of journalism. Objectivity is just another defensive crouch against bad-faith arguments of “bias.”
Wayne Marks
@Dr Ronnie James DO: There are braver journalists in Mexico, the Phillipines, etc facing much greater physical risk and still doing the job.
Redshift
@SiubhanDuinne: I don’t think that’s correct. When a royal becomes monarch, they can choose any of their names to be their name as king or queen, it doesn’t have to be their given first name.
I learned this from the playbill for “King Charles III,” but here’s another unimpeachable source.
SiubhanDuinne
@Brachiator:
Some of those are names of princes (Albert) and princesses (Diana) who have married into the Royal family. The Queen naturally wouldn’t have any input or say over their names. And most Royal babies get a whole string of names. King Edward VIII, later the Duke of Windsor, was Edward Albert Christian George Andrew Patrick David, a litany that includes the patron saints of England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales. But he was always simply called David by family and close friends.
SiubhanDuinne
@Amir Khalid:
Harry is reputed to be an Arsenal fan, so maybe.
SiubhanDuinne
@Redshift:
Yes, of course. I should have more accurately said “13 unique regnal names.”
Betty Cracker
@Dr Ronnie James DO: Exactly right. I had a small flash of hope when the actual Mueller report came out and it knocked some of the coverage off the obviously fraudulent COMPLETE EXONERATION NO COLLUSION narrative, but that was short-lived. Apparently the spectacle of an AG acting as a personal attorney for a lying president has been absorbed into “normal” by the same crowd that swooned for months over Bill Clinton’s brief encounter with Loretta Lynch on that tarmac…
James E Powell
And eat at diners. All Midwestern people just love their diners.
different-church-lady
@Redshift: Objectivity should be a tool that leads you to the truth. But far too many people think objectivity means finding the exact middle of a polarizing situation, or balancing the representation of competing claims. Instead, objectivity ought to mean that you will not let your personal biases influence your evaluation and presentation of the truth.
Brachiator
Journalism is often a grubby business. Getting involved with sources is sometimes necessary to getting a story, period. Look at something as meaningless as the sports beat. You piss off an athlete, you don’t get no story. And some writers don’t even pretend to be “objective,” and are more fans and homers than the most devoted season ticket holder.
One thing that I liked about the movie “Spotlight” is that they acknowledged that the Boston Globe was part of the Establishment and that past associations had helped make it possible for gross abuses to be overlooked. Even people who thought that they were cool, hard headed reporters had also been kids who looked up to priests. Marty Baron, the editor who let his people loose on the scandal, was an outsider, and was castigated for not … “understanding” how things were done.
It is a tough balancing act.
Also, on the other side, you have media outlets who see it as their responsibility to defend and protect the status quo.
James E Powell
@dr. bloor:
They no longer believe that, if they ever did. They are all about access and entertainment because that’s what drawers viewers & readers. And that’s the only reason anyone gets a promotion or a raise. What everyone who aspires to a career in journalism knows is that liars get book deals and people who tell uncomfortable truths are never invited back on a cable show.
different-church-lady
@Brachiator: “Getting involved” can mean many different things. There’s a difference between developing a professional relationship with the subject and developing a friendship, for example. The former can be objective, the latter cannot.
Brachiator
@SiubhanDuinne:
Sure. But Albert became a traditional name after Vicki’s beloved husband. Princess Charlotte is Charlotte Elizabeth Diana, and so Diana is now a possible perennial princess name. Louis is a remembrance of Prince Charles’ favorite relative Louis Mountbatten and earlier princes, etc
Barbara
@SiubhanDuinne: If you include people (younger sons) who died before they assumed the throne, you could add the name Arthur — the oldest son of Henry VII and brother of Henry VIII. You could also include Matilda, the mother of Henry II who contested the claim of Stephen to the throne. There are also a lot of “sibling names” of princes and princesses who were in line to the throne but never got there — most of the children of Queen Victoria, since she had a total of nine. Of course, none of those names is likely to be high on the list of names favored by Meghan and Harry either, but it does expand the universe a bit.
ETA: Charles I was a younger son. That’s how the name Charles was added to the list of names considered suitable for the king of England.
dww44
@jeffreyw: LOL! Good point. I should have said it better. More along the lines of her stating that she consciously tried to maintain her journalistic independence.. Wish I could remember that interviewee’s name so I could find it in their archives. I think it’s still very relevant today.
J R in WV
So CBS News is replacing their current anchor, Jeff Glor, with Norah O’Donnell on the CBS Evening News, and the LA Times lead sentence in that story is:
That’s pretty well done in my book, accurate and a great play on words. Witty even.
Sean
My relative, who would be pretty disinclined to vote conservative in just about every scenario, avoided voting in presidential elections for the 30+ years he was active military (with the exception of the last one – close to retirement and too much on the line). I never quite agreed with the stance but understood it (voting for your boss or company’s CEO – especially in a strong hierarchical org – is a bit odd I suppose).
Karen
@Dr Ronnie James DO:
1. These “journalists” work for media owned by Republicans.
2. They are soooooooo scared of being too liberal that they OVER compensate.
3. They want a horse race but strangely enough they’ve already decided that the Dems won so they need to help out the Republicans. That includes sabotaging Dems, purposely publishing rumors and publishing lies the president and the rest of the GOP are putting out there.
rikyrah
This should not happen
Brachiator
@different-church-lady:
Friendship, favoritism, butt kissing is part of the dark side of journalism. You can’t really eliminate it.
Baud
@SiubhanDuinne:
Agree. I like her.
Immanentize
@Dr Ronnie James DO: That Gotti example is excellent. I am so using that.
waspuppet
And that’s not even what happens, of course. There is not, and never in my lifetime has there been, any concern by elite journalists that they are being unbalanced in favor of Republicans and conservatives. It’s only when they spend a couple of column inches/seconds of airtime pondering the possibility that Democrats and liberals are proposing things that people actually want that the Fairness Bell starts ringing.
SiubhanDuinne
@Barbara:
The Queen has signed off on Zara, Savannah, Isla, Mia, and Lena.
Immanentize
@Brachiator:
Charles is probably a bad omen name as well….
Immanentize
@James E Powell:
Ever notice how they are at diners when they really should be at work?
Barbara
@SiubhanDuinne: All girls and, I believe, all girls whose parents did not want titles for their children. That’s likely the bigger fight — whether they want the child to become a “commoner.” Apparently, the queen was none too pleased when Princess Anne so stated with her children.
TenguPhule
@Immanentize:
They are experiencing economic anxiety, which can only be treated by salt, grease and sugar.
Immanentize
@SiubhanDuinne:
How about Xena? I’d like the UK to have a warrior princess for once.
hitchhiker
You just reminded me of a moment of existential despair way back in Dec 2016.
Martin
Been out of things the last few days, but this BuzzFeed article on Katie McHugh was an interesting read.
I work with young people so forgiving dumb shit is pretty much in my DNA. I have no interest in Katies attempted redemption. That she’s burned her career is fine with me. Maybe she can find success in some other career. But the article is revealing in how ideological circles work structurally (how fellowships pull in people who are probably not otherwise employable), how they network, advance the cause, and so on. You do get the sense that Nobody on the right really disagrees with the alt-right. They tolerate them to varying degrees, but is seems mostly because of the optics and not because they are abhorrent people with abhorrent ideas. I’m sure there were more than a few Germans who were concerned about the Nazis, but were pretty happy upon learning that the adjoining Jewish owned farm could now be purchased – and at quite a discount.
Brachiator
@J R in WV:
Very good.
NotMax
@Immanentize
Boudica.
James E Powell
@TenguPhule:
Add coffee and you’ve got all four food groups.
Immanentize
@NotMax:
Hmmmm. Not a great example — fought the Romans, lost, then poisoned herself. Although still a fierce Celt, no doubt.
Martin
@J R in WV: Yeah, the journalists I know have the same view. One of them became a founding journalist at Pro Publica which is when I realized that the whole notion of that publication was to do nothing but that kind of work. I think it’s the most important journalistic entity out there right now.
One of the things that Watergate should have taught the public is that conspiracies can’t be viewed head-on. The conspirators can anticipate that kind of scrutiny and are generally good at masking it. You have to look at them from the side – from an angle they don’t anticipate. That’s what ‘follow the money’ really refers to. They can’t clean up all of that stuff, so that’s where you work your way in. These days it’s probably more accurate to say ‘follow the shell companies’ and ‘follow the 501c entities’.
Martin
@Redshift: Right. My understanding is that it’s the same tradition as picking a confirmation name (or maybe papal name is more appropriate). It serves to signal what kind of ruler you seek to be by drawing a historical parallel on the name, and also serves to elevate prior rulers into that saint category. Choosing a good player name is always important in any RPG.
Brachiator
@Immanentize:
Matilda, Boudica and the underrated Æthelflæd, Lady of the Mercians. She was the eldest daughter of Alfred the Great and kicked some ass.
WhatsMyNym
@NotMax:
+1
J R in WV
@SiubhanDuinne:
Pretty sure I saw P. Harry tell us it was a boy… so..?? Prince Lena?? I think not.
Kathleen
@Immanentize: Maybe they’re “retired”. Didn’t you know the only important voters are old white men voters (followed by young white male Nazi voters)?
I thought you were a trusted member of the Jackalista commentariat.
SiubhanDuinne
@Barbara:
True. Princess Anne is mother of Zara, and grandmother of the other four. I believe Mia and Lena are Zara Tindall’s kids, and Savannah and Isla are the daughters of Peter Phillips (Anne’s son). And yes, Anne was always insistent that neither her husband(s) nor her children be given royal titles.
catclub
WAPO:
I keep wishing one of the prosecutors to put this in his report was named Mueller. But maybe that is why Barr ain’t giving up the unredacted version.
TenguPhule
We are a nation of men, not laws.
Ohio Mom
@SiubhanDuinne: I occasionally see Aimai on the Lawyers Guns and Money threads. Apparently she finished her MSW and is busy with her full-time job.
IIRC, she is working with extremely improvised patients with chronic mental illness. If I misremember tne details, just know it is a very challenging population, whatever it is.
I do remember her stopping by here months and months ago and being discombobulated that her nym and email kept disappearing. Several jackals tried convincing her that this is (alas) our new normal.
dww44
@J R in WV: Yes. No word on what’s happening to Jeff Glor either. I actually like him lots. Afeared he’s a casualty of the #MeTooMovement vis-a-vis Charlie Rose and Les Moovies. That, and not high enough ratings.
Also, too, Norah O’Donnell is not my favorite female broadcaster, especially since that 60 Minutes interview of Valerie Jarrett late in Obama’s term. Although Valerie kept her cool, my recollection is that O’Donnell didn’t. She was just oozing dislike, bordering on pure venom. I remember coming away thinking, wow, Valerie Jarrett must be the evil power behind the throne.
Roger Moore
@RAM:
The system has already been corrupted, and there are few incentives to reverse the corruption:
1) The people at the top- the owners and publishers- are on the side of the DC elite, so they don’t object to behavior that tends to make their media favor the elite.
2) The people in the middle who might enforce or model the rules- editors and more senior journalists- see the ability to hobnob with the rich and powerful as a perk of the job and consequently don’t want to make and enforce rules that keep them from doing it.
schrodingers_cat
@catclub: So we have a King who is above the law. Nice. What exactly was the revolution about, then?
catclub
@Martin:
When I become an international criminal kingpin, and hide it all in 501c charities, the forms I submit to the IRS will appear clean.
Likewise, when I run for president, the IRS forms I reveal to the public might not turn out to be the same ones I send to the IRS – or I might later file the 1040-X adjusted return. I am confident I would not be the first presidential candidate ( ahem, Mitt Romney) to think of this.
catclub
@Ohio Mom:
impoverished?
immunocompromised?
catclub
@schrodingers_cat:
protecting wealthy landowners from excessive taxation?
TenguPhule
@schrodingers_cat:
Tax cuts.
dww44
@Brachiator: Any explanation why “Andrew” wouldn’t be in that list? Found the given names of the Queen’s 3 other offspring in it.
NotMax
OT.
Weird. Went to check on the status of a Priority Mail letter at USPS and their site informs me it arrived at the local post office – ‘arrived,’ that is, 2 hours and ten minutes in the future from now.
TenguPhule
@NotMax:
So you simply have to go back to the future to pick it up.
catclub
@TenguPhule: ha! beat ya to it by two minutes!
rikyrah
Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) Tweeted:
BREAKING: New @NRA President Carolyn Meadows says Rep. Lucy McBath was elected because she’s Black. “…it’s wrong to say the reason she won was because of her anti-gun stance. …it had to do with being a minority female.” https://t.co/Z3H8a7g8Yu https://twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/1125431609706942464?s=17
catclub
Slate:
Trump is saying. “Next time, all the accountant stuff is going through the lawyers.”
trollhattan
@rikyrah:
She seems “nice.” //
Give it to the NRA, they never change and always stay on message.
Ol'Froth
Totally OT, but, I got the lawn Moe’d. For good measure, I also Larry’d and Curley’d it. I also did a bit of Shemping. But I refuse to Joe. No one likes Joe.
MomSense
@Redshift:
I agree with you that the standard should be truth but I think everyone has certain biases. I guess I would like journalists to be open about what their biases are. It seems like that disclosure would be helpful for both the reader and the author in assessing how their biases affect their coverage.
I also hate the idea that both sides of an issue have to be presented. There is not a credible other side to climate science, vaccinations, and a bunch of other issues. Presenting the other side equally lends fringe positions more credibility and exposure than they merit.
rikyrah
@rikyrah:
Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) Tweeted:
Meadows is also the leader of an organization that blocked the construction of a monument to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. on Stone Mountain, Georgia (there are already carvings there of Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson and Jefferson Davis).
https://t.co/n6qf42hceK https://twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/1125432943072108544?s=17
catclub
@rikyrah: I would not want MLK on Stone Mt with those guys unless they jackhammered the others off.
Ruckus
@Betty Cracker:
The nation survived when there was only a local press. The nation survived Nixon. And thought it might not. We are the nation, we just have to assert ourselves, take back our rightful place as the owners. We have journalism in many ways today. It probably isn’t any better or any worse than it was 200 yrs ago. And people without gobs of money have voice, like right here. We won’t if the capitalization of the internet continues to it’s logical conclusion, which is all ads, all the time. Yes it costs some to be here in any force, this blog is a prime example, someone has to pay to keep up with putting it up every day. But as someone here said the other day, old style journalism is dying. I predict that by the time of the last of my generation it will cease to be a force, at least the force that it is today. Places like TPM will take over the dissemination of the news. There will be TV news but I’d bet it will be local because the cost of putting it out there is more than most want to pay for it. How many of us still watch TV news? Other than it’s on while we eat…
Do not get me wrong here, DT and the republican party is trying it’s damndest to destroy the country for it’s owners benefit, but there are more of us than them, and they have stopped trying to hide their agenda. We just have to inform enough people what is happening, which they can see if they look, and we can take this back. The republicans and the MSM, but I repeat myself, are trying to stop us, convince us, sell us, that what they are doing is for our own good. But it is obvious to anyone that has not swallowed the Kool Aid that they are lying and full of shit.
This is not end game, this is an opportunity.
Martin
@catclub:
If Mueller is going to say this, it’ll be on live TV, under threat of perjury to Congress. No opportunity for Barr to pre-spin the statement.
Mueller understands this game. He knows he can’t push. All he can do is signal and wait for the question to be asked in the right setting. It’s up to House Dems to set the stage and not fuck it up.
zhena gogolia
@Martin:
I saw somebody tweet something from his spokesperson that seemed to indicate he would not say this. It was like, “He could have said it in the report but he didn’t.”
ETA: Ok but now I see in the WaPo story that they declined to comment. So Twitter lied, hoocoodanode.
Martin
@Ruckus:
Barely. No way the run-up to the Civil War would have played out with a national press like we have now. It was instrumental to the civil rights movement. TV coverage of Bloody Sunday was pivotal. We’re really good at not looking. Sometimes the nation needs to be forced to look. As personally damaging as it would have been to the families, we should have seen the photos from Sandy Hook. The nation needs to be forced to see it. It was key to public opinion about Vietnam.
Local media is critical, no question. But national and international media really does change how public policy works.
Barbara
@Martin: I read this, and I still can’t fathom how detached from reality McHugh was/is. Here is another article on a related subject, about the use of academic medieval studies by white supremacists: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/05/arts/the-battle-for-medieval-studies-white-supremacy.html?searchResultPosition=2
I googled the offending UC professor’s name, and basically, all you get is the right wing echo chamber.
Martin
@zhena gogolia:
I suspect Mueller knew the danger of putting it in the report. He could see the compromise to the DOJ. He knows Barrs history. He knows Rosenstein. He may like these people, but I know my friends shortcomings and I avoid putting them in positions where those shortcomings shine through. I think Mueller knows that the report could be buried, redacted, and so on, and I think he expected that it would based on how Barr got the job. Barr is clear that he doesn’t believe that it’s possible for the President to obstruct justice. That’s not a hidden belief – it’s in his 19 page job application. So, what’s the point of sending Barr a report that says that Trump obstructed justice? What would it yield other than forcing Barr to reassert his view and undermine Muellers view? And Mueller has no control in this situation. What’s more, he knows DOJ policy is that the president can’t be indicted. So what’s the point of a charging statement if he knows the DOJ is obligated to refute that – and it’s easy for them to say ‘Mueller knows this isn’t possible which suggests he’s compromised’.
I expected that report would be written for Congress, and it appears that way. Democrats are supposed to be a little disappointed. Dems attacking Mueller gives him credibility with the right. And he wants incensed House Judiciary dems to demand why he didn’t implicate the President more strongly. He doesn’t want to do this in writing where it will be twisted and partially represented. He knows the power of the reveals from Watergate. The public gets it live, in exactly the way he wants it to be conveyed. He has control, not Barr.
At the same time, he’s not going to do Dems job for them, because if it came out that he coordinated that it would destroy the result. The threads are there to pull on. Dems just need to have the guts to pull on them.
Brachiator
@dww44:
Not sure. Apparently “only one king has had this name in his set: Edward VIII, who had it because Andrew is the patron saint of Scotland.”
Other names that have been used as princely names are Christian, Patrick, Frederick and Ernest.
Roger Moore
@Brachiator:
Pissing off an athlete is far more often a result of a reporter being too involved with his sources than it is from refusing to be involved. Most of the case I can think of where a reporter has completely lost their ability to get a story from an athlete are a result of either A) the athlete feeling betrayed by a reporter he thought was a friend or B) a reporter sucking up to management by taking their side in a dispute with a player. A purely professional relationship in which the reporter never tries to be close to the athletes seems like a much better approach.
Ruckus
@Redshift:
I have to ask, “Whose truth?”
I’d like to know where is is spelled out that journalism is a practice in the use of truth as generally accepted. Because it isn’t. It is a form of communication whose goal is to inform and to influence. It always has been and will always be that. That doesn’t mean there isn’t good or bad journalism, it just means that scientific truth isn’t the basis of what journalism is, has ever been or will be in the future. People pay others to write, speak, present their opinions. And opinions are like assholes, everybody has at least one.
Martin
@Barbara: Yeah, quite a few subjects are that way, unfortunately. Economics is notable for being closed to outside views.
For all the accusations of liberalism at universities, there’s a shocking amount of disciplines being completely locked down by ideologues.
Ruckus
@Martin:
I probably didn’t present my idea all that well. Long but not as well as I’d like.
I don’t disagree that national media is important. It was important in the case of Nixon. But the current national media isn’t as important as it was during Vietnam or Nixon, because we have something more today than then. We have communication on a personal basis far exceeding what we had then. It’s not uniform or as professional (whatever the hell that means) but it can be far wider spread. Take the last 3 yrs as an example. How much of things that are real news, The Woman’s March for example, happened not because of national media but because of the internet which allowed them to communicate rapidly and coordinate rapidly. And turn out millions world wide. National media reported on that, but wasn’t the conduit to getting it there in the first place. Women did that on their own with the internet. I went and met others there and didn’t go because of any media coverage.
That’s my point, that we as citizens have a way to make things happen and learn about events that can shape our lives and country without the traditional national or local media.
frank (honestly)
@different-church-lady:
J R in WV
@MomSense:
But the Earth is FLAT — do you hear me? FLAT!!!!!!!!
No one has walked around over the edge and some back to tell us of the roundness, and nor will anyone ever do that. Because it is FLAT!!!
And THAT is the Objectuse Factoid of the Matters.
The end!
//
Original Lee
@SiubhanDuinne: Ever since we toured the church where William the Conqueror is (sort of) buried, whenever he is mentioned, I can’t help but remember at least one of the anecdotes the docent told about him. They were mostly not complimentary. The Bayeaux Tapestry tour was much nicer to William.