Comments on: Raging Double Standard Alert

By: The Anchoress » Radio bloggers, Plamegame, “Indulgences” for rich eco-sinners

Mon, 12 Feb 2007 22:45:29 +0000

[...] Flopping Aces looks at when anonymous sources are not to be believed by the press. Apparently it’s whenever the source tells a story the press doesn’t want to hear. Gaius is pithy about it. And you know, Death to America doesn’t really mean Death to America…I guess it means something subtle like, “Death to America until George Bush is out of office and then she’ll simply lay down for us…” or something. [...]

By: Flopping Aces

Flopping Aces — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 21:31:15 +0000

When Death To America Doesn’t Really Mean Death To America…

Now this is quite funny. The MSM, who have never seen an anonymous source they didn’t want to hug immediately now complains that one of their own is using one. Of course this source is telling them Iran is responsible……

By: Granddaddy Long Legs

Granddaddy Long Legs — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:59:03 +0000

Greg Mitchell is actively trying to control the narrative on Iran, and he’s just angry that his colleagues aren’t following his advice. Back in April of 2006, he wrote:

“The media dropped its guard in the run-up to the attack on Iraq. Will they redeem themselves if pressure builds for an air strike or war against Iran? There are some indications that some lessons may have been learned [...] Newspapers may be in the role of bullpen stopper right now, with the current Iran “semi-crisis.” In baseball lingo, they should try to “put out the fire” there, after losing one for the home team in Iraq three years ago [...] To those who would say that this inflates the power or even role of the press in America today, I would reply: You don’t expect the Democrats to keep us out of war, do you? Just as they would not stand up to the president on Iraq for fear of appearing “weak on terror,” they would likely be wary of appearing “weak on the Tehran Bomb.” Let’s face it: All the Democrats want to do right now is stagger through to November with an unpopular president in office, and hope that, maybe, they can re-take at least one house of Congress — without having to stick their necks out.

So the media, usually only a middle-reliever or in a mop-up role on this playing field, might have to pitch with the game on the line.”

He’s staked out the position that the self-titled “messengers of information” should manipulate the facts to control the public debate. And he probably still considers himself to be a fair and unbiased journalist. Sad, isn’t it?

By: TC@LeatherPenguin

TC@LeatherPenguin — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 14:56:19 +0000

Mitchell=Columbia J School=”IGNORE.”

By: jpe

jpe — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 14:53:13 +0000

We tend to give more credibility to adverse anonymous statements. If the speaker is toeing the admin line, it just looks like the admin’s way of starting a whisper campaign, of getting unproven assertions into the news. A contrary statement, though, carries risks of employer retatiation: the risk of leaking would probably have to counterbalanced by something of importance that the public ought to know but that the administration thinks would be politically damaging.

That’s just common sense.

By: Quilly Mammoth

Quilly Mammoth — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 14:39:49 +0000

Of course the Krazy Koz Kidz beat him to the punch. Even one diarist with an impressive military background that I usually respect has descended to calling the information about Iran “Rovewellian”.

::sigh::

BDS is such a terrible thing. It’s actually become harder and harder to laugh at the madness because now it can have serious consequences.