Monday, November 17, 2008

You're Not Obsolete, You Just Don't Report News


"It used to be that a handful of editors could decide what was news-and what was not. They acted as sort of demigods. If they ran a story, it became news. If they ignored an event, it never happened. Today editors are losing this power. The Internet, for example, provides access to thousands of new sources that cover things an editor might ignore. And if you aren't satisfied with that, you can start up your own blog and cover and comment on the news yourself. Journalists like to think of themselves as watchdogs, but they haven't always responded well when the public calls them to account."

To make his point, Murdoch criticized the media reaction after bloggers debunked a "60 Minutes" report by former CBS anchor, Dan Rather, that President Bush had evaded service during his days in the National Guard.

"Far from celebrating this citizen journalism, the establishment media reacted defensively. During an appearance on Fox News, a CBS executive attacked the bloggers in a statement that will go down in the annals of arrogance. '60 Minutes,' he said, was a professional organization with 'multiple layers of checks and balances.' By contrast, he dismissed the blogger as 'a guy sitting in his living room in his pajamas writing.' But eventually it was the guys sitting in their pajamas who forced Mr. Rather and his producer to resign.

"Mr. Rather and his defenders are not alone," he continued. "A recent American study reported that many editors and reporters simply do not trust their readers to make good decisions. Let's be clear about what this means. This is a polite way of saying that these editors and reporters think their readers are too stupid to think for themselves."

When an organization avoids doing their job because they decide to inform their stupid readers which stories they have think are most important for fulfilling their agenda while ignoring actual news and information the readers feel is important, they will continue to bleed red ink. The media should inform, not dictate.

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Associated Propaganda Poll: We don't want people to keep promises

AP Poll

This is a prime example of the media trying to push their viewpoint and manufacture consensus rather than reporting the news. Obama before the election was running web ads and the first page of his website was devoted to you seeing how much money you would "save" under an Obama administration because of his tax plan.

Now of course comes the huge, extravagant swearing in, and then we will have the lip biting State of the Union Address where we will be told HOPE™ and CHANGE™ involves us not asking what Obama can do for us, but what we can do for Obama. The thing that we will be doing of course is paying more taxes. It will be fine though. AP will have already had several months worth of polling for the talking heads to spin. The support for tax cuts was "soft" anyway and wasn't the "primary" reason Obama was elected. The fact that it is a huge lie and a broken promise, we could investigate that, but we hear that Trig Palin still has a sock at her house that was paid for by RNC money and we need to send several teams out to investigate that instead.

Go Camille Go!

Liberal Democrats are going to wake up from their sadomasochistic, anti-Palin orgy with a very big hangover. The evil genie released during this sorry episode will not so easily go back into its bottle. A shocking level of irrational emotionalism and at times infantile rage was exposed at the heart of current Democratic ideology -- contradicting Democratic core principles of compassion, tolerance and independent thought. One would have to look back to the Eisenhower 1950s for parallels to this grotesque lock-step parade of bourgeois provincialism, shallow groupthink and blind prejudice.

I like Sarah Palin, and I've heartily enjoyed her arrival on the national stage. As a career classroom teacher, I can see how smart she is -- and quite frankly, I think the people who don't see it are the stupid ones, wrapped in the fuzzy mummy-gauze of their own worn-out partisan dogma. So she doesn't speak the King's English -- big whoop! There is a powerful clarity of consciousness in her eyes. She uses language with the jumps, breaks and rippling momentum of a be-bop saxophonist. I stand on what I said (as a staunch pro-choice advocate) in my last two columns -- that Palin as a pro-life wife, mother and ambitious professional represents the next big shift in feminism. Pro-life women will save feminism by expanding it, particularly into the more traditional Third World.

As for the Democrats who sneered and howled that Palin was unprepared to be a vice-presidential nominee -- what navel-gazing hypocrisy! What protests were raised in the party or mainstream media when John Edwards, with vastly less political experience than Palin, got John Kerry's nod for veep four years ago? And Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas, for whom I lobbied to be Obama's pick and who was on everyone's short list for months, has a record indistinguishable from Palin's. Whatever knowledge deficit Palin has about the federal bureaucracy or international affairs (outside the normal purview of governors) will hopefully be remedied during the next eight years of the Obama presidencies.

I've had several friends recently that I simply stopped discussing politics with and they were of the opinion that it was related to the pending loss of McCain. Nothing could be further from the truth. If anything after eight years of RINO Bush, we want someone with clear conservative principles and credentials and that was not John McCain.

As Paglia notes, it was the pure rage and emotionalism that stopped the discussion. You can't have a discussion with someone who isn't thinking and instead is stuck in a circle of hateful imagery and emotional chanting that precludes all thought. Real facts attempt to puncture this and they just ratchet up the self-enforcing delusion. Now that the media is waking up from their Obama hangover, perhaps they will do the same and might begin resuming rational thought. Chanting no hate, no mcsame isn't rationale discourse and it isn't something worth participating in.

Monday, November 10, 2008

We Can Laugh At The Media and Soon our President as Well.

They shouldn't been such an easy target but then they should report news.

Sunday, November 9, 2008

News? My Job is to Help Obama!

I'm sure when we are bailing out the media who won't be able to make a dime spreading propaganda instead of reporting the news, it will be because they are a vital national interest and just need some time to get their act together.

One day we will laugh at Obama and not just those around him

Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are


Huge Voter Turn Out Didn't Happen

Despite widespread predictions of record turnout in this year’s presidential election, roughly the same portion of eligible voters cast ballots in 2008 as in 2004.

Between 60.7 percent and 61.7 percent of the 208.3 million eligible voters cast ballots this year, compared with 60.6 percent of those eligible in 2004, according to a voting analysis by American University political scientist Curtis Gans, an authority on voter turnout.

A good candidate, a good campaign and someone who helps the party follow it's core principles would have gotten Republicans a good result. There isn't some huge tsunami of unbeatable Democrats out there. This is about a tune up, not ripping the party to pieces.


Clearly with Obama as only president-elect, nothing has truly changed with regard to policy or budget. Even when he comes into office it will still take quite some time for whatever is acted on to come to fruition.

Yet, in article after article we are already told that those things won't matter because Obama will inspire the change with his mere election. This morning on Meet the Press I heard that people are already telling themselves to stop selling drugs on street corners and to finally start helping their children with school homework. All this is based on nothing more than inspiration.

You'll have to pardon me if I chuckle a bit. I wish I had a insanely huge DVR so I can play the world's biggest game of "I told you so."

Utopia is here. Obama ran on it and now will deliver it with his mere election. The Bloggers of Iran are safe, your car is full of gas, your mortgage is "affordable", your job is safe, nothing is to big to fail because everything is a vital national interest and it is of course a national interest even though Obama is a citizen of, leads and inspires the entire globe.

Maybe not. Maybe when Meet the Press has the editor of Newsweek on for an Obama-lovefest/Roundtable and asks him his views, but not why his poll was the most inaccurate of the entire cycle we can see that what is being pushed yet again is propaganda and not news.

Prepare yourself accordingly.

A Primer for the First 100 Days of the Obama Administration

People will be begging for Republicans soon enough after Democrats taking and spending all their money doesn't achieve that promised utopia. Obama will not free you from paying the rent and filling the car up with gas. Finally in "post-racial" America, we will realize that we aren't past racism when we can hire him, but rather when we can fire him.

Saturday, November 8, 2008

Washington Post Ombudsman - Hell yeah are we biased.

The Post provided a lot of good campaign coverage, but readers have been consistently critical of the lack of probing issues coverage and what they saw as a tilt toward Democrat Barack Obama. My surveys, which ended on Election Day, show that they are right on both counts.

My assistant, Jean Hwang, and I have been examining Post coverage since Nov. 11 last year on issues, voters, fundraising, the candidates' backgrounds and horse-race stories on tactics, strategy and consultants. We also have looked at photos and Page 1 stories since Obama captured the nomination June 4. Numbers don't tell you everything, but they give you a sense of The Post's priorities.

The count was lopsided, with 1,295 horse-race stories and 594 issues stories. The Post was deficient in stories that reported more than the two candidates trading jabs; readers needed articles, going back to the primaries, comparing their positions with outside experts' views. There were no broad stories on energy or science policy, and there were few on religion issues.


But Obama deserved tougher scrutiny than he got, especially of his undergraduate years, his start in Chicago and his relationship with Antoin "Tony" Rezko, who was convicted this year of influence-peddling in Chicago. The Post did nothing on Obama's acknowledged drug use as a teenager.

Isn't it fun when such things are admitted AFTER the election. I don't really care about the drug use of Obama but then I didn't care about Joe the Plumber but the Post found a way to report on him including details about his licensing and liens. The difference of course is bias and sadly, Joe the Plumber was a campaign prop while Barack Obama is president-elect.

One gaping hole in coverage involved Joe Biden, Obama's running mate. When Gov. Sarah Palin was nominated for vice president, reporters were booking the next flight to Alaska. Some readers thought The Post went over Palin with a fine-tooth comb and neglected Biden. They are right; it was a serious omission. However, I do not agree with those readers who thought The Post did only hatchet jobs on her. There were several good stories on her, the best on page 1 by Sally Jenkins on how Palin grew up in Alaska.

Joe who? Biden? The name sounds vaguely familiar. By chance is he a plumber? No. Hmmmm, he is running mate on the ticket and has been serving in the United States Senate for 30 years but you can't seem to find anything on him. That indeed is telling. Can anything but bias explain why we know more about one Joe and nothing about the other?

Thursday, November 6, 2008

Go Youth Vote!

Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year.

College students, consider this your $725 a year tax increase. High School students, enjoy the taxation without represention.

I Hope™ you enjoy the Change™.
No, CNN Isn't Biased...

Coming on the heels of victory for Obama, CNN's own online video selections contain not one video, not two, to be frank I lost count at twelve - video's with misleading headlines, such as "Michael Crichton Dies" or "Heroes in Question"... So, these videos should be about Michael Crichton and Heroes, right? Or at lease dominate the video piece? Nope... Unbelievable. The video's mislead the viewer into something interesting, and force you to drink more Liberal Kool-aid to get a tiny morsel of that which you came for.

They gave Crichton only 1:06 for a 3:10 piece titled "Michael Crichton Dies"... The beginning of all-out liberal flag waving for 4-8 years.

I guess you could say "be ready to get only a 1/3 of what you're owed".

No Media Bias to see, Please Move Along

Which Polls were Most Accurate?

The list with a few highlights on my part. Rasmussen was second most accurate last cycle if I recall correctly. Either way the trend is pretty clear.

1T. Rasmussen (11/1-3)**
1T. Pew (10/29-11/1)**
3. YouGov/Polimetrix (10/18-11/1)
4. Harris Interactive (10/20-27)
5. GWU (Lake/Tarrance) (11/2-3)*

6T. Diageo/Hotline (10/31-11/2)*
6T. ARG (10/25-27)*
8T. CNN (10/30-11/1)
8T. Ipsos/McClatchy (10/30-11/1)
10. (D)/Research 2000 (11/1-3)

11. AP/Yahoo/KN (10/17-27)
12. Democracy Corps (D) (10/30-11/2)
13. FOX (11/1-2)
14. Economist/YouGov (10/25-27)
15. IBD/TIPP (11/1-3)

16. NBC/WSJ (11/1-2)
17. ABC/Post (10/30-11/2)
18. Marist College (11/3)
19. CBS (10/31-11/2)
20. Gallup (10/31-11/2)

21. Reuters/ C-SPAN/ Zogby (10/31-11/3)
22. CBS/Times (10/25-29)
23. Newsweek (10/22-23)

The problem of course is that the same folks coming dead last are those broadcasting the debates, and the attempting to form the consensus about who won right afterwards via their talking heads and their polls. Polls at the bottom of that list were off by 100%. They literally doubled the winning margin predicting double digit wins when it wasn't even close to that. They clearly are using their polls to push the news/propaganda instead of reporting. You see a debate, then watch the network go to their "snap poll" which is of course 100% wrong and then watch them spend the next several days repeating their wrong conclusions. It doesn't affect everyone but it does crowd out the real news and it does make it harder for the candidates to discuss issues instead of being hit with "What is your campaign doing wrong to be down 13 points in the polls?"

I watched McCain several times on the Sunday Talk Shows do nothing more than spend the entire segment having to explain how his internal polling didn't show 13 point blow out leads. In the future the candidate should have the gumption to tell the reporter that they blew it last election and unless they care to discuss issues instead of their misreporting, then the interview is done.

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

Apparently, I'm a BIZARRO Californian.

Everything I voted for yesterday did pretty much the opposite of what I wanted it to do. So in California our chickens will have plenty of room on their high speed rail systems but homosexual couples still won't be able to get married.

So yes, that means I voted no on 1a, 2, and 8.

I voted for McCain/Palin and they lost but really, I'm not too sad about that. Democratic plans of governing have amounted to criticism and utopianism. If they think independents will somehow now buy the nonsense that nothing can change now that CHANGE has been elected as president, they will be in for a rude awakening two years from now.

However now is also when the real fun begins. I haven't gotten to watch the last couple of seasons but I used to be a very big fan of the show Survivor. One of my favorite episodes would be right after the merge. Inevitably one tribe would have a pretty large lead over the other and it would appear as if the next several weeks of shows would already be a settled affair with one tribe voting off the other.

This of course wouldn't be very good for ratings so the producers clearly crafted challenges where the fate of the outcome is not in the hands of the individual. Instead the group determines the individual winner. These "pecking order" challenges reveal the hierchy within the tribe and when several parties wake up and discover they are not where they imagined in the pecking order, the fun begins.

In California we want a high speed rail, just don't power it with alternative energy sources. We want our chickens to have room but we can tell our homosexuals like Obama did that we don't endorse homosexual marriage but still claim that we would vote no on 8. I did vote no on 8 but it is clear that a large percentage of Obama supporters did not. Thus the pecking order begins to show the truth to the tribe.

Some of the truths, paygo is a lie and we will soon be pinning for the "small" $250 billion dollar a year deficits we had under Bush. How sad will that be?