Selective Self-Censorship in the Press

Selective self-censorship in the press.

Good read.

Journalism

I feel almost guilty about linking Morgan again, as if this is just some sort of big back-patting fest, which it is not.

In what started out (as his posts often do) as a slightly meandering post -- it meanders to places it needs to in order to pick up the steam it needs in the end to be a truly powerful piece. When Morgan meanders, stick with him - he's got a point and it'll be worth it in the end. He's not a hit-and-run snarky quip kind of guy. The pieces all fall into place like tumblers in a lock and bang! He's opened a cognative door for you.

I think he's on to something about Journalists and Journalism in this post.

Hey, I promise it'll be better than what I would have written on it.

Chris Matthews takes "Slant" to a new level

Perpendicular is more like it. You can't get much "slantier" than that.

Check out the video at the political pitbull.

For a little more on the AP story Matthews uses to defend Kerry, see this Malkin post. The AP story makes a "Michael Moore" style cut to make it appear that he was talking about the President.

As I said in my last post, I don't doubt he was taking a jab at the president -- that's what he does. But he did it through the troops with an extremely disrespectful comment. A comment he refuses to acknowledge the disrespect in and refuses to retract.

Anyway, you gotta love this from Riehlworldview:

Dem Congressman: Kerry Blowing It, Again
Evidently the Congressman didn't want his name attached to the quote. So much for this all being partisan spin.
A Democratic congressman told ABC News Tuesday, "I guess Kerry wasn't content blowing 2004, now he wants to blow 2006, too."

Oh, and he cancelled today's campaign appearances. M-heh!

To me, though, this is less about the insult than it is revealing about the mindset lies beneath it.

I don't want these people running the country.

Who ya gonna call... NewsBusters!

hat tip: Riehl World View

I hope the MSM starts looking in the mirror and self correcting soon. It would be doing the world a service.

The BEEB Who Cried Wolf (from Newsbusters)

21 people of completely indeterminant cultural or religous background...

This is just amazing.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4778575.stm

At least at first reading this morning ... there's no 800 lb gorilla in the room.

Willful dispersion of hezbolla propaganda by the press

The scoop is more important than the veracity of the story -- because CNN (and others) ran with this stuff anyway, without the counterbalancing stories.

CNN's Robertson Now Admits: Hezbollah 'Had Control' of His Anti-Israel Piece

As if in answer to my last post

The New York Times once again undermines our ability to fight these fanatical freaks by disclosing details of another way we track them -- a way that has yielded results in captured terrorists as late as the middle of last year, and that's just ones we know about.

Now it's not just the Times fault. We apparently (although it's not surprising) have traitors in the government. I can name a couple off the top of my head (Murtha, Kerry). Inside traitors leaked classified information to the Times.

Once the Times got this information, though, they proceded to abuse it. Though warned not to publish -- and I think they absolutely knew what the implications were as far as aiding Al Quaeda et. al. -- they did it anyway.

This elicited some of the straightest talk I've ever heard from a government official -- Treasury Secretary John Snow (in a letter to executive editor Bill Keller ) :

You have defended your decision to compromise this program by asserting that "terror financiers know” our methods for tracking their funds and have already moved to other methods to send money. The fact that your editors believe themselves to be qualified to assess how terrorists are moving money betrays a breathtaking arrogance and a deep misunderstanding of this program and how it works. While terrorists are relying more heavily than before on cumbersome methods to move money, such as cash couriers, we have continued to see them using the formal financial system, which has made this particular program incredibly valuable.

Lastly, justifying this disclosure by citing the “public interest” in knowing information about this program means the paper has given itself free license to expose any covert activity that it happens to learn of - even those that are legally grounded, responsibly administered, independently overseen, and highly effective. Indeed, you have done so here.

[emphasis, mine]

Precicely! These. People. Ought. To. Be. Taken. Out. And. Shot. The whole arrogant lot of them. Maybe the New York Times will be Al Queda's next American target. Nah. Who'd destroy their best weapon?

Patterico has an excellent roundup of responses. He also has this excellent post.

Update: I watched Bush's reaction and response. I don't think I've ever seen him that angry before, and I don't blame him one bit. I'm sure the pompus presumtuousness of the leading compound question he was asked didn't help matters.

Tony Snow's was blunt and honest as well.

Does the Media make Terrorism worse?

Ya think????

Focus on Terrorism May Make it Worse