The Insidious Justification For Media Silence On Benghazi And IRS Scandals: Conservatives Cared Too Much
Mediaite - 4 hours 3 min ago
There is no conspiracy. The imagined cabal of political journalists and editors colluding in their respective conference rooms to bury news items which are potentially damaging to President Barack Obama or his liberal allies is just that – imagined. There is, however, like-think in the political press that results in an institutional culture which views with suspicion any story that conservative media outlets deem worthy of added scrutiny. Some of the media’s most influential members are beginning to realize that their own biases have shielded the administration from criticism. This was not intentional, but it was nevertheless the result of a kneejerk dismissal of stories that conservatives exhibited too much enthusiasm over. Acknowledging this condition is the first step to correcting it. The backlash from within the media by its most trusted voices has begun.
Over the weekend, The National Review’s Jim Geraghty artfully forced Bloomberg View columnist Margaret Carlson to acknowledge the fact that the media was dismissive of the Benghazi scandal simply because conservative outlets thought the story merited examination. On CNN’s Reliable Sources, Geraghty accused the mainstream press of brushing off the Benghazi scandal because those “wacky guys” in the conservative media saw significant political ramifications for the Obama administration in the story.
“Those ‘wacky guys’ did go too far,” Carlson insisted. “They have been looking for Watergate for so long that, you know, they went too far on Benghazi.”
“They were making it into this huge, impeachable – and some used the word impeachable offense – without much,” Carlson added.
“It didn’t seem like they had a sense of urgency about it, a real sense of outrage,” said NBC News Chief White House Correspondent Chuck Todd on MSNBC’s Morning Joe on Monday. No, he was not talking about the revelations last week regarding a coordinated effort by high ranking members of the Obama administration to confuse and complicate the real reasons behind the attack on an American consulate in Benghazi in 2012. Todd was talking about the brewing scandal surrounding the years in which members of the Internal Revenue Service targeted conservative groups.
“And then look at the reaction of the entire Democratic Party,” Todd continued. “Why aren’t there more Democrats jumping on this? This is outrageous no matter what political party you are.”
“This story has more legs politically in 2014 than Benghazi,” Todd concluded. This final disclaimer should be interpreted as more an effort at self-defense than an example of honest political analysis.
Todd has spent the better part of the last week downplaying the political relevance of the notion that members of the State Department, with the likely knowledge of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, facilitated that maintenance of the White House’s political narrative that Al Qaeda had been neutralized just weeks before a presidential election.
“For this conspiracy theory that some people believe is out there — that the White House was trying to downplay a terrorist attack because of the election — then they did a really poor job of it,” Todd said last week of the Benghazi scandal. “Because within three or four days, it was pretty clear to the entire world this was a terrorist attack from a group that had some sort of extremist Al Qaeda ties.”
For Todd, the fact that an alleged cover-up failed is evidence enough that no cover-up existed. Of course, this blatant effort to exonerate the White House is deeply fallacious.
This was the same NBC News Chief White House Correspondent who had recently called the notion that some media outlets were not honest brokers when it comes to stories that conservatives believe can damage Democrats a “mythology.” This the same NBC reporter who called U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, whose nomination as the next secretary of state was scuttled by her being sent out to disseminate the false pretense behind the Benghazi attack, a “victim” of a culture in Washington that is “overly reactive” to conservative “media outlets.”
Todd’s enthusiasm for the scandal erupting over the IRS’s targeting of pro-GOP groups is as much an admission that the press got Benghazi wrong as anything else. They are guilty of the same dismissal of the IRS story which was first identified in the conservative media outlet The Blaze in February, 2012. It is a justification for the overcompensation that is coming in what will be the media’s dogged pursuit of the IRS story.
The coming weeks are likely to demonstrate that the political media is nowhere near as protective of the White House as they are protective of themselves and their institution. Burned on Benghazi, the press seems prepared to overcorrect with a tireless investigation of the IRS scandal. But while the investigation into IRS’s targeting of GOP groups is likely to go cold before it even reaches the Treasury Department, the cover-up of the administration’s response to the Benghazi attacks implicates members of the Cabinet of the President of the United States.
The media, shamed, is a cornered animal and the White House will be the on the receiving end of scrutiny yet unseen. But the conservative media would be wrong to declare victory and withdraw. There remain more questions than answers for both the Benghazi and IRS scandals. For the first time in a long time, the political press appears unwilling to dismiss those questions as conservative obsessions.
Categories: The Media
Politico Blogs - 4 hours 29 min ago
POLITICO's chief White House correspondent Mike Allen takes Playbook live interviewing Obama Campaign Manager, Jim Messina for a morning conversation about policy, politics and the news of the day.
Articles from today's event:
Politico Blogs - 4 hours 33 min ago
POLITICO's chief White House correspondent Mike Allen takes Playbook live interviewing Americans for Tax Reform President, Grover Norquist for a morning conversation about policy, politics and the news of the day. To view all video from the Playbook series, please click here
Stories from the event:
Keep the conversation going: #PlaybookBreakfast
View Pictures: Facebook.com/POLITICO-events
Politico Blogs - 4 hours 53 min ago
President Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron, speaking at a joint press conference Monday at the White House, said they have both spoken to Russian President Vladimir Putin and while there may not be agreement yet on a way forward, they have reached some common ground.
"It is in both our interests that at the end of this there is a stable democratic Syria," said Cameron, who met with Putin Friday.
"If you look objectively, the entire world community has an interest in seeing a Syria that is not engaged in sectarian war...," Obama said, adding that would mean a Syria without slaughter that is acting as an "island of peace" in the region instead of an outpost for extremists. "That's also true for Russia."
Obama said he has also had several conversations with Putin. "Our basic argument is that as a leader on the world stage, Russia has an interest as well as an obligation to try and resolve this issue," he said.
He warned, though, that even if Russia sides with the United States and the United Kingdom in an effort to oust Syrian leader Bashar al Assad, there are other actors in the conflict that will make it difficult to resolve, including Iran and Hezbollah.
"All that makes a combustible mix, and it's going to be challenging," he said.
Mediaite - 4 hours 58 min ago
During his radio show on Monday afternoon, Geraldo Rivera tore into his Fox News colleague Eric Bolling for what he believed to be “slanderous” remarks about whether the post-Benghazi investigations would be different had the presidential daughters been the ones killed in the siege.
During last Thursday’s edition of The Five, Bolling suggested the media would be asking different questions if it had been Sasha or Malia Obama who died in the Benghazi attacks. Liberal blogs proceeded to attack the Fox host for invoking the presidential daughters while excoriating the press and the Democrats for not being as concerned about a potential Benghazi cover-up.
Bolling appeared on Rivera’s radio show and the two, along with former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, got into a heated debate similar to their November 2012 “screaming match” over the Benghazi controversy. The trio went head-to-head-to-head over just how much scandal the administration’s talking points should generate, and whether the feds are engaged in a cover-up.
Towards the end of the conversation, Rivera brought up Bolling’s remarks about the presidential daughters, leading to this exchange:
RIVERA: Eric, did you say that President Obama would have sent help if Malia and Sasha were in Benghazi? Did you say that?
BOLLING: No, here’s what I said…
RIVERA: Did you make that outrageous, slanderous remark?
BOLLING: Alright, ready. Do you want to listen? Or you just want to lob a grenade? Here we go: I turned to Beckel. I said, Bob, you have a son and daughter…. If they were there, would we be asking different questions? That is my quote.
RIVERA: I think it is unbelievable that you went that far.
RIVERA: Because to bring a man’s daughters in — it just continues a slanderous angle that helps nobody. I got tears in my eyes because I love you.
Spitzer chimed in before the commercial break that Bolling has a “good issue here” with the Benghazi scandal, but cautioned the Fox host: “Don’t waste it by going a bridge too far.”
Listen to the full segment below, via The Geraldo Rivera Show:
Categories: The Media
Politico Blogs - 5 hours 4 min ago
Actor Samuel L. Jackson is slated to play the U.S. president in an upcoming action-adventure movie, according to the Hollywood Reporter:
Samuel L. Jackson is attached to star as the president of the United States in rising star Jalmari Helander's English-language debut, Big Game.
The movie is billed as an adrenaline-fuelled action-adventure and tells the story of a shy, nervous 13-year-old boy who, like his forefathers, takes a test of manhood by spending one day and night alone in the wilderness of a vast local forest.
Armed only with a bow and arrow, his task is to return with a prize to prove himself. But when Air Force One is shot down by terrorists, the young man discovers the U.S. president in an escape pod, and they have to team up as the terrorists close in.
Mediaite - 5 hours 9 min ago
Reacting to President Barack Obama’s statement on Monday, in which he called the revelation that the State Department altered talking points regarding the attack in Benghazi to remove references to terrorism a “sideshow,” the guests of MSNBC host Chris Matthews said that the president was largely correct. One panel guest called the Benghazi scandal “weak ground” for the Republican Party. In a political context, the guests agreed that the scandal regarding the politicization of requests by conservative groups for tax-exempt status from the Internal Revenue Service will yield the GOP more benefits.
Matthews insisted that the GOP has been frustrated with having to embrace immigration reform and they do not want to be “the gun party.” This, he says, is the reason for the party’s focus on the Benghazi scandal.
Matthews played a clip of the president telling reporters in the East Room of the White House on Monday that his administration could not be complicit in a cover-up of the Benghazi talking points because within a week they had changed the focus of the investigation into the attack.
“What he’s actually talking about is this question which Republicans have never been able to nail down, which is motive,” MSNBC.com editor Richard Wolffe. “Why would the White House want this cover-up?”
Matthews And Wolffe agreed that the point which was established in the 2012 presidential debates, that Obama called the attack on Benghazi an act of terrorism, resolves the issue about the edited talking points.
“The motive question doesn’t stack up to the actual event, and nor does it stack up to the actual reporting – contemporaneously, wide-spread reporting – saying that this event in Benghazi had something to do with Cairo,” Wolffe said referencing the region-wide demonstrations against an anti-Islamic YouTube.
TIME Magazine reporter Aparisim “Bobby” Ghosh agreed that the GOP will find more fertile ground to attack Obama on the IRS scandal rather than the Benghazi controversy.
“I would say, at best, this is very, very weak beer,” Ghosh said. “If this is the issue that the Republicans are looking to use against the president over Benghazi, then they’re on very, very weak ground.”
“If I were in the Republican Party, I’d be paying much more attention to the IRS scandal,” Ghosh concluded.
Matthews said that Ghosh was correct because voters are more concerned with their pocketbook than with Benghazi.
Watch the clip below via MSNBC:
Categories: The Media
Politico Blogs - 5 hours 18 min ago
Defense lawyers for a man facing war crimes charges at Guantanamo Bay are asking a military judge to guarantee the attorneys' right to use pens, notebooks and even eyeglasses during meetings with their client, according to a motion released Monday.
The motion was precipitated by a lawyer for prisoner Abd Al-Rahim Al-Nashiri being told he could not bring a wire-bound, spiral notebook to a meeting with his client. The attorney, Richard Kammen, said he'd brought notebooks to such meetings since 2008, without incident.
"JTF-GTMO...determined that the thin wire spiral binding of the notebook constituted something of a threat," lawyer Richard Kammen wrote in the motion (posted here). "There has never been any past suggest ion that a wire bound notebook would or realistically could be disassembled to provide a client with a weapon, but after he was not allowed to use his spiral notebook, counsel utilized as different notebook with binder clips that in counsel's opinion could more easily be used as a weapon than the spiral in the spiral notebook."
Kammen said Guantanamo personnel quoted security directives to him that appeared to ban not only spiral notebooks, but also pens and eyeglasses at meetings between lawyers and their clients. But, he said, those items haven't been prohibited in practice.
"Both counsel and client are regularly permitted to bring their eyeglasses into meetings. Similarly, counsel has always been permitted pens and pencils of varying composite materials, sharpness, and lengths in both meetings with the defendant at the detention facility and in proceedings before this commission," Kammen wrote.
The civilian attorney said, however, that guards sometimes step in to regulate the use of pens. "Should counsel allow a client to write with counsel's pen for any length of time during attorney-client meetings, the guards interrupt and require the detainee to use another more flexible pen which, presumably in the opinion of JTF-GTMO, constitutes less of a threat," the motion says.
Al-Nashiri is charged with planning the attack on the U.S.S. Cole in a harbor in Yemen in 2000, which killed 17 American sailors and injured several dozen more.
Guantanamo defense lawyers have been doing more than their usual share of writing longhand in recent weeks, after breaches and failures involving computers prompted the chief defense attorney to order a halt last month to the use of computers for all confidential materials.
Politico Blogs - 5 hours 24 min ago
President Obama says he learned about the IRS scandal the same way everyone else did -- from news reports.
He said during a press conference Monday that if the reports are found to be true and the agency targeted conservative groups for extra scrutiny during last year's election, then further action must be taken.
"This is pretty straightforward," Obama said. "If in fact IRS personnel engaged in the kind of practices..that were reported on, then that's outrageous and there's no place for it, and they have to be held fully accountable."
The president noted that the IRS is an independent agency and that the American people must be able to have faith that it is completely independent and not driven by political bias.
"This is something that I think people are properly concerned about," he said. "... If you've got the IRS operating in anything less than a neutral and nonpartisan way, then that is outrageous..."
"I've got no patience with it, I will not tolerate it," Obama said.
POLITICO's Jennifer Epstein has the full story over on the home page.
Politico Blogs - 5 hours 33 min ago
President Obama says the focus on the editing of Benghazi talking points is nothing more than a politically motivated "sideshow."
He said during a press conference Monday that the American people should instead be focused on the administration's response to the attacks -- the effort to determine who carried them out, bring them to justice and ensure it never happens again. Obama noted that his administration is already implementing recommendations from an independent review.
"The whole issue of talking points, frankly, throughout this process has been a sideshow," he said.
The talking points about the attacks on the American diplomatic facility in Libya that killed four Americans on 9/11 turned out to be wrong, and the White House initially said it had very little involvement with editing them, but emails surfaced last week showing they were revised 12 times with significant input from the State Department and at the direction of the White House, as reported by ABC News. The edits included removing any reference to an al Qaeda affiliate and to CIA warnings prior to the attack.
The president said Monday that those emails were provided to members of Congress months ago who concluded there was nothing wrong, but now "suddenly three days ago, this gets spun up as if there's something new.
"There's no there there," he said.
Obama argued that if this was some kind of coverup, as his critics have suggested, then he and his administration would not have released the information.
"The whole thing defies logic," he said, adding that he believes it's a politically motivated attack by his opponents who have used it to also raise money. He said the exercise "dishonors" those who died, including the late ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens.
"We don't have time to be playing these kinds of political games here in Washington," Obama said. "...We dishonor them when we turn things like this into a political circus."
Mediaite - 5 hours 36 min ago
Like a great double-play combo, Fox News’ hard news and opinion programs occasionally use a bang-bang chemistry that allows them to complete the news equivalent of a twin-killing with their most ardent viewers. The latest example of this technique is a report on America’s Newsroom that fields a new Justice Department study, distorts it in a pro-gun light, then flips it to Fox News Watch at second, who pivots and fires it to the viewers at first base, as the truth dives headfirst for the bag in vain. The hustle, in this case, is for their hard news report to assert that a new Justice Department report “blows some huge holes in popular perceptions about guns and violence,” which Fox News Watch then turns into a segment about why the media won’t report on the “new” findings.
On Friday, America’s Newsroom anchor Bill Hemmer introduced a report on the Justice Department study by calling it “A new study suggesting most Americans have a distorted perception of gun violence in America.”
He quoted states from the report indicating that gun murders have dropped 39%, and non-fatal gun crimes 70%, since 1993. Tossing to reporter Doug McKelway, Hemmer asked “What does this mean, Doug?”
McKelway feinted at objectivity by saying that the report doesn’t prove that more guns equal less crime, but “there is a very strong correlation that suggests that.”
He called the study “welcome news to Second Amendment supporters,” and said that it “blows some huge holes in popular perceptions about guns and violence,” adding that “it may cause many to rethink efforts to restrict gun show sales. For example, it found among state prison inmates who possessed a gun at the time of their offense, only 2% bought their gun at a flea market or gun show.”
That stat, though, is actually nothing new. It’s drawn from a 2004 survey of state prison inmates, and is a poor measure of the need for background checks. This is self-reporting by people who have already been caught, a tiny, unreliable subset at best.
McKelway also played a clip of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi attributing the drop to laws like the expired assault weapons ban, and explaining that without federal laws, state and local gun laws are less effective because people can just travel to skirt the law. This seems like a pretty fair and balanced thing to do, doesn’t it? Especially since there’s nothing at all in the Justice Department report to support Pelosi’s ravings, right?
Put a pin in that. McKelway concludes that “There are between 310 million and 400 million guns in private possession across the United States. That is more than at any time in our history, and gun violence is down. Although it remains higher here than in any other western nation.” Watch below:
Got that? Gun violence is way down, so there’s obviously no need to regulate guns. This is a weighty claim to make, but if the data supports it, then this is exactly the kind of analysis that’s missing from journalism these days.
As Lt. Frank Columbo would say, there’s just one more thing. What happened to the report’s opening thesis, that Americans have a “skewed perception” of gun violence? The Justice Department study says nothing about public perception, and McKelway doesn’t present any evidence to support that part of the story. That’s a glaring omission, made more glaring by the fact that Pew just released a study that does address public perceptions about gun violence, and even buys into the same flawed premise that Fox News did. Entitled “Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware,” the Pew report shows that, as of March 2013, “56% of Americans believe gun crime is higher than 20 years ago and only 12% think it is lower.”
That’s the perfect peg for McKelway’s report, so why not use it? Could it be because that same Pew report contains a graph that immediately exposes the problem with its own conclusion, and McKelway’s?
As you can see, almost all of the significant drop in gun homicides occurred between 1993 and the year 2000, and the same pattern holds for other gun stats. If Americans don’t perceive that gun violence is dropping, it’s because it isn’t, at least not for the last 13 years. Most Americans also probably don’t “perceive” a huge drop in the sale of disco records, either.
Those dates sort of ring a bell, though, don’t they? What happened in 1993 that could have caused such a sharp drop in gun violence, or at least correlated to it? That was the year the Brady Bill was passed, instituting federal background checks, and it was followed, the next year, by the passage of the federal assault weapons ban. Between 1993 and 2000, gun homicides fell by 54%, and non-fatal gun crime fell by 37%. After 2000, many of these stats leveled off, but a few actually ticked up. The year 2000 was the year that Al Gore lost the election, Supreme Court notwithstanding, because he couldn’t carry his home state, allegedly because of gun control. Democrats abandoned gun control, and gun violence stopped decreasing.
Granted, this is correlation, not causation, but it’s a much more compelling one than McKelway draws to gun ownership. In 1993, 54% of households reported owning a gun, a number which dropped to 41% in 2000, when the drop in gun violence hit its floor. Since then, as gun violence held steady or increased slightly, that number has increased to 47%. However, the rate of personal firearm ownership was 42% in 1993, decreasing to 32% in 2000, and is at 34% today. Less guns, under McKelway’s premise, equals less crime.
The question shouldn’t be whether gun violence is decreasing, anyway, but rather, are 30,000 gun deaths a year acceptable, and how many, if any, of those deaths can be prevented? Since the enactment of a law requiring seat belts in cars, the rate of traffic deaths has fallen 78%, but that doesn’t mean we stopped trying to make cars safer, or traffic laws more effective.
Fox is under no obligation to make a case for gun control, but if they’re going to present statistics, they ought to do so in a way that serves the public, not the needs of its opinion programming. An objective assessment of these statistics would include the glaring fact that the drop in gun violence all occurred over a dozen years ago, and would allow news consumers to form their own judgments. As Pew points out in the weeds of its study, there are many factors unrelated to guns which could account for the overall drop in crime, and media attention has likely given Americans the impression that gun violence is increasing more than it is, but not to the degree that Fox’s report, or Pew’s headline, suggest. If anyone else wants to report on these findings, and I think they should, they should do so honestly.
Categories: The Media
Obama Accuses Opponents Of ‘Political Circus,’ Calls Benghazi Talking Points Controversy ‘A Sideshow’
Mediaite - 5 hours 48 min ago
During a joint press conference with the British Prime Minister David Cameron this morning, President Obama went off on his political opponents and the press for the controversy over his administration’s Benghazi talking points, calling the entire ordeal a “political circus” and “sideshow” with “no there there.”
Asked by the Associated Press about the unfolding controversy, which included last week’s House Oversight Committee hearings with several State Department whistleblowers as well as revelations that the administration repeatedly revised its talking points in the wake of the attacks to omit key facts, Obama proceeded to scold his opponents:
“The whole issue of talking point, frankly, throughout this process, has been a sideshow. We have been very clear about throughout that immediately after this event happened we were not clear who exactly had carried it out, how it had occurred, what the motivations were. It happened at the same time as we had seen attacks on U.S. embassies in Cairo as a consequence of this film and nobody understood exactly what was taking place during the course of those first few days. And the e-mails that you allude to were provided by us to congressional committees. They reviewed them several months ago, concluded that in fact there was nothing awful in terms of the process that we had used. And suddenly, three days ago, this gets spun up as if there is something new to the story. There is no there there.”
He expressed astonishment that some among his political colleagues would consider the possibility that his administration actively tried to “downplay” the Benghazi attacks:
“So if this was some effort on our part to try to downplay what had happened or tamp it down, that would be a pretty odd thing that three days later we end up putting out all the information that, in fact, has now served as the basis for everybody recognizing that this was a terrorist attack and that it may have included elements that were planned by extremists inside of Libya. Who executes some sort of cover-up or effort to tamp things down for three days? The whole thing defies logic.”
He then accused his opponents of hyping the controversy for political gain:
“And the fact that this keeps on getting churned out, frankly, has a lot to do with political motivations. We’ve had folks who have challenged Hillary Clinton’s integrity, Susan Rice’s integrity, Mike Mullen and Tom Pickering’s integrity. It is a given that mine gets challenged by these same folks. They used it for fundraising, and, frankly, you know, if anybody out there wants to actually focus on how we make sure something like this does not happen again, I am happy to get their advice and information and counsel.”
The president concluded by chiding his opponents for turning the controversy into a “political circus”:
“We dishonor [the fallen] when we, you know, we turn things like this into a political circus. What happened was tragic, it was carried out by extremists inside of Libya. We are out there trying to hunt down the folks who carried this out and we’re trying to make sure we fix the system so that it doesn’t happen again.”
Watch below, via Fox:
Categories: The Media
Mediaite - 5 hours 51 min ago
During a press conference in the White House on Monday, President Barack Obama was asked about reports that the Internal Revenue Service targeted conservative groups for added scrutiny over the course of the last two years. The president condemned the actions of members of the IRS who enforced federal tax laws in a partisan fashion. “I’ve got no patience with it,” Obama said. “I will not tolerate it.”
“I first learned about this from the same news reports that I think most people learned about this,” Obama began. “This is pretty straightforward. If, in fact, IRS personnel engaged in the kind of practices that have been reported on and were intentionally targeting conservative groups, then that’s outrageous.”
“And they have to be held fully accountable, because the IRS as an independent agency requires absolute integrity and people have to have confidence that they’re applying it in a nonpartisan way – applying the laws in a nonpartisan way,” Obama continued.
“You should feel that way regardless of party – I don’t care whether you’re a Democrat, independent, or Republican,” the president added. He said that the perception that the IRS is biased is something people should be “properly concerned about.”
“I can tell you that if you’ve got the IRS operating in anything less than a neutral and nonpartisan way, then that is outrageous, it is contrary to our traditions, and people have to be held accountable and it’s got to be fixed,” Obama concluded.
Watch the clip below via Fox News Channel:
Categories: The Media
Mediaite - 6 hours 21 min ago
At the top of the show on Monday, The View co-host Barbara Walters announced she’ll be retiring in the summer of 2014. Reflecting on her long career, Walters thanked those who have joined her for the ride — and hoped she may have inspired other young women to pursue a television career.
Walters began her announcement with a trip down memory lane, via a video, narrated by Walters herself, chronicling her start, her many years in the industry, and some of her particularly notable interviews — ranging from world leaders to celebrities.
“In the summer of 2014, a year from now, I plan to retire from appearing on television at all,” Walters announced, noting that she’s been on television for a whopping 50 years. “It has been an absolutely joyful, rewarding, challenging, fascinating, and occasionally bumpy ride. I wouldn’t change a thing. I’m perfectly healthy, this is my decision. I’ve been thinking about it for a long time, and this is what I want to do.”
Walters further added that she will remain co-executive producer of The View and may come back on special occasions, making it clear that: “I’m not walking into the sunset.”
Thanking those who have traveled the road with her, she hoped she “may also have inspired other women to make television in front or behind the cameras as a career.”
“I smile when some young woman says, ‘I grew up watching you on TV,’” she said. “It’s their time now.”
Take a look, via ABC:
Categories: The Media
Mediaite - 7 hours 42 sec ago
CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley gave his fellow journalists a scolding this weekend while accepting an award from Quinnipiac University, urging his colleagues to quit worrying about being “first” to publish a story and to avoid using social networking sites for information, as they are solely “gossip.”
“This has been a bad few months for journalism,” he lamented. “We’re getting the big stories wrong over and over again,” he continued, referring to — among many examples — the media’s initial misidentification of the Newtown shooter’s mother as a school employee.
“Let me take the first arrow,” he said, explaining how he himself made such false reports.
He also placed some blame on social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit: “In a world where everybody is a publisher, no one is an editor. And we’ve arrived at the point today.”
Those sites are “not journalism,” he warned. “That’s gossip. Journalism was invented as an antidote to gossip.”
As for news outlets desperate to be first with a big scoop, Pelley cautioned: “If you’re first, no one will ever remember. If you’re wrong, no one will ever forget.” He called such pursuits “vanity,” designed to fulfill “self-conceit … to make ourselves feel better.”
Watch a portion of his remarks below, as clipped by NowThisNews:
Categories: The Media
Mediaite - 7 hours 2 min ago
Read the rest of this entry »
Categories: The Media
Mediaite - 7 hours 5 min ago
On Saturday afternoon, Paula White was supposed to host her final three-hour show after a six-year stint as the BBC’s “Radio Stoke” afternoon DJ. But apparently she took the departure too close to heart, reportedly getting quite tipsy before slurring and giggling her way through the first 30 minutes of the broadcast. She was eventually yanked off the air and replaced on her final day as host.
“For the last time on lunchtime let’s sssssay yooooou pick the music,” she began the show. “Oh, yeah,” she said in a breathy drunken-sounding voice before pushing buttons to play the first tune.
After reading some listener farewell messages, White said: “It’s a P-A-R-T-Y because I ssssaid sooooo? Some people will say, ‘Oh, thank goodness she’s gone.’ Other people will go, ‘Mmmm, how will I get the dog to sleep?’ Because I know that people play this show out for their dogs. How lovely!”
Encouraging her listeners to send in playlist requests, White stumbled through explaining that she’s going to throw out her selections because it’s her final day. “I’ve cried about ten times today,” she giggled.
One listener suggested, via text, White was intoxicated. She denied it with a giddy squeal: “I’m not drunk, I’m not drunk. I’ve had a couple of drinks. I’m not drunk!”
She also apparently had difficulty working the boards. While attempting to play Katrina and the Waves’ hit song “Walking On Sunshine,” she instead played a short commercial jingle. “It’s my last day, why’s nothing working?” she asked.
Eventually her colleague Dan Siegertsz appeared on the air in White’s stead, telling the audience: “Paula is not feeling well and has gone home.”
Listen to the antics below (edited without commercials and songs) via the Mirror:
Categories: The Media
Matt Drudge Ties IRS Scandal To Obamacare, Foreshadows ‘Brave New President’ After ‘American Holocaust’
Mediaite - 7 hours 28 min ago
Amid the controversy over Uncle Sam singling out politically conservative groups, Matt Drudge took to Twitter on Monday morning to offer his take. Linking the IRS scandal to President Obama‘s health care law, the Drudge Report creator foreshadowed civil war, an “American Holocaust,” and a “brave new president.”
Recently, Sarah Palin, too, drew a connection between health care and the IRS, noting that the “same corrupt” agency “will be in charge of enforcing Obamacare.” Drudge weighed in thusly — including some interesting hypotheticals:
Speaking of hypotheticals…
And he summed it up with a dystopian prediction:
Drudge hasn’t been the only one expressing outrage — if not quite as hyperbolically — over the issue this morning. Over at MSNBC, Chuck Todd questioned lack of anger from Democrats while Willie Geist deemed it “tyranny.” Glenn Beck, meanwhile, reminded that his site had covered this problem much earlier.
Categories: The Media