Posts filed under ‘Media – General’
That was eleven years ago today.
Greg Mitchell wrote an e-book about media coverage in the run-up to and the early months of the Iraq war. Today he reminds us of how the corporate media reported Bush’s trip out to that aircraft carrier on that day eleven years ago. It illustrates how deeply broken our media is. Everyone quoted here should have been fired for violating the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics:
Chris Matthews on MSNBC called Bush a “hero” and boomed, “He won the war. He was an effective commander. Everybody recognizes that, I believe, except a few critics.” He added: “Women like a guy who’s president. Check it out. The women like this war. I think we like having a hero as our president. It’s simple.”
PBS’ Gwen Ifill said Bush was “part Tom Cruise, part Ronald Reagan.” On NBC, Brian Williams gushed, “The pictures were beautiful. It was quite something to see the first-ever American president on a—on a carrier landing.”
Bob Schieffer on CBS said: “As far as I’m concerned, that was one of the great pictures of all time.” His guest, Joe Klein, responded: “Well, that was probably the coolest presidential image since Bill Pullman played the jet fighter pilot in the movie Independence Day. That was the first thing that came to mind for me.”
Maureen Dowd in her column declared: “Out bounded the cocky, rule-breaking, daredevil flyboy, a man navigating the Highway to the Danger Zone, out along the edges where he was born to be, the further on the edge, the hotter the intensity.
“He flashed that famous all-American grin as he swaggered around the deck of the aircraft carrier in his olive flight suit, ejection harness between his legs, helmet tucked under his arm, awestruck crew crowding around. Maverick was back, cooler and hotter than ever, throttling to the max with joystick politics.”
When Bush’s jet landed on the aircraft carrier, American casualties stood at 139 killed and 542 wounded.
People acted up against austerity today (i.e., giving money to banks and starving We the People) in Spain and Chile. Don’t expect to see coverage of these events on your local TV (they don’t want to give us any ideas).
Anti-Austerity Protesters Join Forces in Spanish Capital
Tens of thousands of protesters from across Spain converged in Madrid on Saturday calling for an end to EU-imposed austerity which has deepened poverty amongst the worst-off.
The so-called “Dignity Marches” brought tens of thousands to the capital, Reuters witnesses calculated, in support of more than 160 different causes – employment, housing, health and education and an end to poverty amongst them.
Banners urged the conservative government not to pay its international debts and to tackle unemployment of 26 percent.
Chileans Rally to Demand Promised Reforms
Tens of thousands of protesters have marched in Chile to press Michelle Bachelet to follow through on ambitious reforms she pledged before assuming the presidency less than two weeks ago.
The protest on Saturday in central Santiago, dubbed “the march of all marches”, was the first of Bachelet’s new term and the biggest political demonstration since huge student protests in 2011.
Organisers said at least 100,000 people were present, even without core groups of student protesters active in the past. Those activists said they would not take part because they were working with Bachelet on education reforms soon be sent to Congress.
The march underscored lingering frustrations in Chile, which has one of the region’s widest inequality gaps. It also raised expectations following four years of rule by the unpopular Sebastian Pinera.
Protesters said the march was a warning sign they would not go easy on Bachelet.
“This is not a protest against Bachelet or for her, it’s just an alert for the political class so they know people have demands,” said Oscar Rementeria, a spokesman for gay rights group, Movilh.
The 40 activist groups that helped fill the streets supported causes ranging from environmental protection to gay and indigenous rights.
If anyone sees any coverage of this in the U.S. media, please let me know.
Thanks in advance.
You know Politico’s Mike Allen.
He’s one of those Very Serious People who’s on television all the time talking about the “conventional wisdom” in Washington. This is the first sentence of his post today over at “Politico’s Playbook: Mike Allen’s Must-Read Briefing on What’s Driving the Day in Washington:”
CONVENTIONAL WISDOM SHIFT: For the first time, top Republicans tell us there is a better than 50 percent chance that they’ll take the Senate.
I’ve been wondering where all the certainty about Republicans taking the Senate in November is coming from and now I know, it’s coming from ah, Republicans!
Oh, and and just in case that sentence somehow changes (wink, wink) here’s a screenshot:
The next time you hear the likes of John McCain or his sidekick Lindsey Graham accuse Obama of a lack of “leadership” or “resolve” in all things foreign policy, remember, when they use those words, they’re counting on us presuming they have detailed, deeply considered plans of their own.
Chances are good they don’t:
The Cliches of “Leadership” and “Resolve”
It’s true that hawks typically assume that real “leadership” requires the use of force or at least the threat to use force, but it can also function as a generic euphemism for U.S. hegemony. In this usage, there is really only one kind of international leadership that qualifies, and this is one in which the U.S. is dominant, preeminent, and preoccupied with policing the globe. This tends to view leadership more as an exercise in giving orders and dictating terms.
As with its ugly cousin “resolve,” one can always get away with insisting that a particular president isn’t showing enough “leadership” in the world, because there is no way to measure these things and no way for the complaint be remedied. Because it is so ill-defined and frequently abused, it can be applied to every issue without even having to think about the specific details. “Leadership” is always the correct response, and “leadership” can’t fail, because it means everything and nothing at the same time.
Too bad the “liberal media” doesn’t press them by asking, and following up on one simple question: “What would you do?”
Check out this February 28 tweet from Sara Hussein and the understatement of the week, i.e., that the Agence France Presse (AFP) photographer, Ahmed Gharabli, “somehow manages to keep snapping.”
When the media writes about Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper (we call him Howdy Doody here in Colorado) objecting to Colorado voters legalizing marijuana, it should be ah, kind of relevant (to say the least) to note that Howdy Doody is a freaking beer magnate and of course he doesn’t want marijuana to take hold:
John Hickenlooper Warns Govs on Pot Legalization
Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper urged fellow governors Saturday to be cautious about following his state’s lead in embracing marijuana.
The Democrat worries other states will legalize pot so that they can tax it and fill budget shortfalls.