Until Dan Rather or CBS comes clean or Congress completes an investigation, this thing is not going away anytime soon, as much as I want it to.
I’m following the big bloggers following the news on this, so I’ll update this post periodically.
Do you think Congress should investigate ? Power Line weighs in. The Allahpundit needs a break. Blogs for Bush sees a conflict of interest in CBS’s “investigation.”
The White House did it! IMAO: Bringing people together. Does the Washington Post come clean? See BeldarBlog.
Big Media is old news, says Idler Yet.
Professor Bainbridge reacts to mainstream media’s comments about bloggers.
Off-topic: Michelle Malkin trackbacked the Irreverent Reverends II post. Excellent. The more people who know what the “reverends” really believe, the better.
Reminder: I’ve disabled linking within comments. I may have found the cure to comment spam sickness, so linking may be restored this week. I’ll keep you posted.
Update: Power Line on Mark Steyn latest.
{ 15 comments }
Hi La Shawn,
Here is today’s op-ed from the NY Times about Blacks and the GOP. Curious to hear your take.
You asked earlier what other reporters think about the Rather mess. As one who has never claimed to be more than a reporter and a writer for nearly 35 years, I am both astounded and not at all surprised. The downfall of “big” journalism began when two Big Media reporters were credited with bringing down a President. Three decades later, it appears a half dozen or so bloggers — a mysterious breed only now coming to the attention of most Americans — may be bringing down a Big Media reporter who tried to bring down a President.
In both cases, of course, the one brought down did the deed all by himself — the outside forces merely exposed him. At the time of Watergate, the Washington Post did what a newspaper is supposed to do. And while some questions remain as to the manner in which their two stars played their role in history, as Rather would plaintively cry as his own world collapsed, the story was true even if the documents were forged. What he failed to grasp was that is not reporting — even had it not had the secondary onus of being untrue in the first place.
Are bloggers now the new media, the new power, the new face of journalism? No. They are the old face, the digital descendants of 18th Century pamphleteers. Not to say that makes them unimportnat. After all, where might we be today had it not been for pamphleteers such as Benj. Franklin and Thomas Paine?
What can and should be hoped is this episode will swing the pendulum back again, so for perhaps a few short years we may have as near a separation of news and opinion as is humanly possible. Something few in “Big Media” have even attempted for the past 30 or so.
J.R.
“. As one who has never claimed to be more than a reporter and a writer for nearly 35 years, I am both astounded and not at all surprised.”
I mean, after judith miller, do we trust the liberal media?
Where is Connie Chung when you need her (wistful sigh)?
I know–we’ll start a movement…
BRING BACK CONNIE!!!
The Allahpundit link you listed linked to a very funny and amusing link to an open letter to Danny Boy from Texas Good ol’ Boy, titled “The Road less Graveled”
Thanks for the comments!
GC- If you’re referring to the Gates piece, I’ve seen it. I may blog about it. Very interesting.
Re: the ecosystem shake-up. Go, La Shawn.
You’re neck-and-neck with blond brainiac Virginia Postrel and making Oliver Willis sweat. (Sorry about the image.)
Those smug self-important liberal brats at The American Prospect are just a few rungs up the ladder. Leaving them behind will be a nice milestone for LB’s Corner.
Not that you’d gloat, or anything.
Hi Lyle – Everything is fixed now, but the shake-up I was referring to had everything skewed. For instance, I was a “Higher Being” and Instapundit was a crawly thing. They were doing maintenance of the servers, I think.
Or maybe the Bear found a temporary wormhole to the future and now it’s closed. Anyway, you’re amongst the brand-name bloggers, and I wanted to Yay for you.
At the risk of feeding a persistent troll:
“I mean, after judith miller, do we trust the liberal media?”
Actus, save the superficially ironic references to NYT repoters for you and your law pals (small though that circle may be) sitting around the snack bar pretending to be grownups. Come back and chat with the adults once you’ve passed the bar exam (if you’re able) and have a real job. Until then, you’re merely a punk with attitude in place of intelligence.
Thankfully, most of my law pals are grownups who came from jobs before law school. The kids out of college are amusing, but sometimes too noisy.
Great Job. CBS finally admitted that they were misled but, we all knew that; not that it matter to uncle Dan.
The case is closed.
It’s all over Drudge this morning.
According to the NYT CBS will say it was decieved about the documents.
Rather interviewed the source (Burkett) in Texas over the weekend and the conclusion is that the documents are not authentic.
Focus is on Ms Maples at this time so Rather may escape dismissal. That’s a shame.
This matter has run a total of 12 days, start to finish, and is an undenable testement to the power of the internet pundits.
Hat tip to all who played a part.
CBS “interviewed” Burkett? Or was it coordinating CYA damage control with the TexDNC?
CBS “interviewed” Burkett? Or was it coordinating CYA damage control with the TexDNC?
======
LMAO!!
It’s actually an attempt to protect the national DNC. Seems as though a one of their higher ups (Joe Lockhart ) contacted Burkett at the behest of CBS a couple of days before the story ran.
Of course nothing came of this conversation. The fact that the DNC started their smear ads on the same subject the day after the story ran is simply a case of the darnest coincidence one might imagine.
Comments on this entry are closed.