Tuesday, August 08, 2006

The Press is a Lame Duck

One of the things I hear all the time from a lot of the MSM types is that the press is the fourth branch of government in the US. They elevate themselves to the level of the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches. Branches which actually are established by the articles of the US Constitution. Branches which have a delicate balance of power between the three.

As a student of the US Constitution and the law I find the concept of a fourth branch of government absolutely absurd. And it makes it all the worse that this fourth branch is supposed to be the press. The actual structure of the government is established by the US Constitution. This structure is specifically defined and restricted by the US Constitution. But there is nothing in the Constitution which restricts the press. However, the Constitution says nothing about restriction of the press. Instead it says "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press". So to support the idea of a "Press Branch" you must support the idea of an unrestricted branch of government. A branch that does not have to respect anybody's rights, that simply does whatever the hell it wants with zero repercussions.

It is a complete absence of restriction and repercussions that the press wants. They want to tell us what they think we should consider priorities. And they don't want to be questioned in the process.

This desire has taken them from reporters of facts to power hungry individuals with their own agenda. Which agenda that is is irrelevant. Almost everyone recognizes that there is a general bias in favor of liberalism in the media, but a news producer could just as easily be biased in favor of conservatism. But the fact is there is an agenda. And we have seen it now in two major events that are too major to ignore as an isolated incident. First we saw it when Dan Rather wanted so much to give a black eye to President Bush during an election year that he neglected to verify falsified documents.

Now we see the Reuters News Service wanting so much to get pictures of the destruction in Lebanon that the horrible American backed, Israelis are doing that they will hire anyone as a photographer without verifying who they are hiring. All they do is drool over the carnage that their freelance photographers email to their editors and say "oh that's great work! All those dead bodies and thick, black smoke! That'll scare the hell out of people and show how disproportionate the American backed Israelis are!" Once again the press is so blinded by their desire to prove how horrible the Americans (and more specifically Bush) are that they don't stop to think that they might be wrong.

This is the hazard that politicians run into when on the campaign trail. They get a tip that their opponent is cheating on his wife they run with it. It doesn't matter if the information is coming from a questionable source. They just see the potential to turn public opinion against their opponent. Here, the press sees the Bush Administration and those that support Bush as their political enemy. But just like that politician that spreads what winds up to be a false accusation, their credibility has been flushed down the drain along with the questionable tipster. And there is no way for the press to recover their credibility at this point.

So I will offer my own journalistic report on the status of the "Press Branch". They have now become a lame duck. And their challenger, the Blogosphere, is quickly gaining in the polls. Reuters, CNN, CBS, and so many others are loosing credibility in the public's eye. But the Blogosphere is consistently gaining ground on the incumbent. More and more people are citing blogs like Little Green Footballs, the Pajama's Media, and even the left leaning Daily Kos. There appears no way for the MSM to keep it's seat in the Press Branch.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2 Comments:

At 8:11 AM, Blogger The Western Seminarian said...

It's worse than that - the press AP, AFP, Reuters, CNN... actually finance terrorism by funding part-time journalists and photographers who are also part or full-time terrorists. They get the "killer picture" after they get done arranging the "kill" themselves - either by launching missiles from a civilian site, or by doing the killing - as in the beach 'explosion' that Israel almost got pinned with. The international media - in seeking their gruesome audience with gruesome scenes - has become a partisan - has become the enemy.

 
At 9:02 AM, Blogger Sunil Shibad said...

It's worse.

One journalist wnats to know:

"Let's try this, shall we? Exactly what is the distinction between riots and terror attacks?
Let's make it specific. Three examples each. Exactly what is the distinction between:


on the one hand, the massacres in Delhi in 1984, the massacres in Bombay in 1992-93, the massacres in Gujarat in 2002


on the other hand, the bomb blasts in Bombay in 1993, the bomb blasts in Delhi in 2005, the bomb blasts in Bombay three days ago.

Anyone care to explain this? (But in civil, reasonable terms. Anything else will be ignored)."

I just cannot believe it!

http://dcubed.blogspot.com/2006/07/two-hands-of-question.html

 

Post a Comment

<< Home