This segment of the political class is simply despicable(On a related note, read this piece from The American Spectator). What is striking about this whole "Journolist" is how stupid these people are. Teenagers are told all the time, be carefull what you type on the internet, it lasts forever. As for their ideology, its boilerplate leftism and less a sign of wisdom and more sign of stale dogmatism. As for Fox, here is the relevant exchange:
The very existence of Fox News, meanwhile, sends Journolisters into paroxysms of rage. When Howell Raines charged that the network had a conservative bias, the members of Journolist discussed whether the federal government should shut the channel down.
“I am genuinely scared” of Fox, wrote Guardian columnist Daniel Davies, because it “shows you that a genuinely shameless and unethical media organisation *cannot* be controlled by any form of peer pressure or self-regulation, and nor can it be successfully cold-shouldered or ostracised. In order to have even a semblance of control, you need a tough legal framework.” Davies, a Brit, frequently argued the United States needed stricter libel laws.
“I agree,” said Michael Scherer of Time Magazine. Roger “Ailes understands that his job is to build a tribal identity, not a news organization. You can’t hurt Fox by saying it gets it wrong, if Ailes just uses the criticism to deepen the tribal identity.”
Jonathan Zasloff, a law professor at UCLA, suggested that the federal government simply yank Fox off the air. “I hate to open this can of worms,” he wrote, “but is there any reason why the FCC couldn’t simply pull their broadcasting permit once it expires?”
And so a debate ensued. Time’s Scherer, who had seemed to express support for increased regulation of Fox, suddenly appeared to have qualms: “Do you really want the political parties/white house picking which media operations are news operations and which are a less respectable hybrid of news and political advocacy?”
But Zasloff stuck to his position. “I think that they are doing that anyway; they leak to whom they want to for political purposes,” he wrote. “If this means that some White House reporters don’t get a press pass for the press secretary’s daily briefing and that this means that they actually have to, you know, do some reporting and analysis instead of repeating press releases, then I’ll take that risk.”Scherer seemed alarmed. “So we would have press briefings in which only media organizations that are deemed by the briefer to be acceptable are invited to attend?”
John Judis, a senior editor at the New Republic, came down on Zasloff’s side, the side of censorship. “Pre-Fox,” he wrote, “I’d say Scherer’s questions made sense as a question of principle. Now it is only tactical.”
The fact that progressives are having a debate about the merits of censorship highlights what the left is all about, power! I highlighted the section by Daniel Davies for it points to the real shock that Fox has "Gone off the reservation" in regards to the rest of the media and as such it is a threat. By the way, there is a lot more to the article then just Fox, it includes the joy one of the enlightened ones would feel watching Rush Limbaugh die and the now obligatory Tea Partiers are racist,fascist,etc,etc...By the way, this is the Tea Party I attended, you tell me what it looks like.
By the way for more snippets like the one below, check here:
0 comments:
Post a Comment