TPMCafe
« A Pro-Unity Government Palestinian Minister from Fatah Speaks Out | Home | The Crisis and Fresh Thinking »

The MSM: Laid Down For Bush While He Sent 4200 Americans To Die, Hating On Obama

user-pic

I don't usually link to Gawker but this is worth a look (also it includes some good links).

It's amazing. Obama has been President less than a hundred days, the country (by every indicator) is in better shape than when he came in, he passed a monumental stimulus package and these guys are just full of sneer.

I get it. They all voted for Obama. They all thought Bush was an idiot. So, to make themselves feel better about themselves, they mock a President they admire. (They couldn't do that to Bush because they had COMPLETE CONTEMPT for him).

In short, it's all about the reporters, all about how they and their buddies see them, nothing about the country. Sort of like Limbaugh but, to his credit, he is ridiculing a President he really doesn't like. Same with Fox.

As for the rest, too bad, boys, not since FDR have you been so outmatched.


40 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

Somehow I don't think Chip Reed or Major Garrett (to name just two) very likely voted for Obama. They all knew that if they asked Bush challenging questions they would lose access. They don't fear it from Obama because he has a basic sense of fairness.

I think he will deal with those who just ask "gotcha" questions in his own way. We'll see.

Listening to Diane Rehm this morning, and checking some sites, it seems that the press was just brilliant, and Obama "had a bad night." I wonder if these people even have a clue...well, no I don't wonder.

user-pic

I said except for Fox

user-pic

I think ol' Chipper, of the "...Democrats raising their ugly heads..." fame is CBS.

user-pic

i like what andrew sullivan writes:

He was elected to change things profoundly, and as he took office, the hurricane forces of economic collapse strengthened. We all know this. Without this context, none of it makes sense. With this context, everything makes sense.

I'm not sure the press corps fully gets this, and I'm not sure that matters very much. Their job is to be polite assholes

user-pic

Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes asked Obama if he was "punch drunk". Now there's a guy that should be condemned and held up to ridicule.

user-pic

I was put off by Kroft's remark. He couldn't seem to see that he was facing someone who was at least as smart as he was, and likely smarter. I am a big 60 minutes fan, but that was out of line. I thought Obama was smiling because he saw the questions as cliches, and he was reading Kroft's mind as he tried to stir up a "reportable" moment.

user-pic

I think we're seeing a media in the midst of massive, fundamental, terminal (in some cases) changes, and reporters who are very frightened people. They're like the people on the deck of a ship going down in the middle of a hurricane, and there aren't enough life boats.

Right now, few have a Ph.D in economics and are getting pressure to produce twice the stories in half the time on topics they don't really understand much better than their audiences do. At the same time, editorial quality control is crumbling under the onslaught of citizen journalist, hacks and outright liars (cable commentators) who are pissing in the punch bowl every day, making it hard to have an authoritative, reflective voice any more.

The 24/7 news cycle is a beast that is never satisfied, too, and add to that the competition from sites like this one, with readers who contribute content and do fact-checking, with updates that happen at dizzying speed from any direction, and then toss in that there's almost instant, vicious ass-whipping from all sides, almost no matter what you do, and that explains some of the simple-minded, superficial behavior we see.

Ed Henry: I'm talkin' about you.

And finally, in the midst of the turmoil and fear and partisan shit-storm, in comes a new president who is a 180-degree change from his predecessor. He's not only the coolest cat in the room, usually, he's also a whole lot smarter than they're used to. He's also a whole lot smarter than they are. So one second they admire him, and the next they hate his guts, just like they hated the brainiac in high school who made it all look so easy.

I don't have real good crystal ball, but I think I'm safe predicting that the media environment a year from now is going to look a lot different than it does now. We ought to play a game, and save a snapshot of last night's press conference to compare with one from next year this time. I'll bet a lot of the faces will have changed, and there will be fewer people in the room.

user-pic

"We ought to play a game, and save a snapshot of last night's press conference to compare with one from next year this time. I'll bet a lot of the faces will have changed, and there will be fewer people in the room."

We can only hope. As someone who used to read the NYTimes from cover to cover until the 90s, it is distressing for me to see what their "reporting" has become. Gracious, I remember having the "trembles" when I couldn't get my daily fix when they went on strike in the late 70s!

Now we have posturing, navel-gazing and snark. Forget the substance. Pose as "cooler than thou." Go for the soundbite and sensational.

user-pic

Many have been looking today for analysis of last nights press conference. It is too bad everyone will not see yours. It is spot on, you have covered it better than any I've seen. I, for one will be looking for your posts & comments anxiously, also looking forward to a year from now, praying you are correct & strongly suspect you are. Great job!

user-pic

Thanks (again!) for naming the names. Worth doing even if it won't accomplish much. Americans are not going to dump their TVs in the recycling bin where they belong. In any ironic way, this is partly the fault of what happened under the Bush administration (both by that admin, and by the toothless Democrat Congressional waffles who provided no meaningful opposition to it): the level of public discourse in government and the news media was dumbed down so far that the public now expects, and thus apathetically accepts, little more than bad soap opera reruns masquerading as public affairs news coverage.

user-pic

hate to say this but i believe part of this is obamas fault.

he has shown that there is no price to pay no matter how you treat him or what you say to or about him.

that doesnt excuse these sad people who believe they are important, but it does help to explain their attemps for attention.

user-pic

Not sure I agree with that. He strikes back by winning. He left two big politicians in the dust on the road to the white house..after gaining a name for himself with a speech, and building on that with campaigning.

He doesn't really need to lash out, as coming off as cynical will ruin public perception.

That's just how I see it, what ways could he go about making them sorry for treating him like this that doesn't alter his image?

user-pic
Obama has been President less than a hundred days, the country (by every indicator) is in better shape than when he came in,

Excuse me... what indicators are you referring to? Certainly not the market, or unemployment, or the deficit, or the pledge about lobbyists, or ethical rectitude. Heh.

user-pic

Piffle.

user-pic

If you disagree with Shooter, why don't you take the time to actually post some indicators, their dates, and their comparative values, in response to his legitimate question?

Your saying "Piffle" is childish and adds nothing to the dialogue.

user-pic

MJ - Do you mean that the MSM "lay down" for Bush?

We progressives should watch our grammar, since we're always calling conservatives yahoos and troglodytes.

user-pic

Also, it is the job of the press to challenge authority, as every progressive knows. Obama is certainly not an exception to this rule.

Finally, if you think the press didn't repeatedly challenge George W. Bush, you must have been living in a different country than I was for eight years.

user-pic

TPC,

on what side of the aisle might I find you and your progressiveness, Republican or Democrat?

user-pic

Tell me what you mean, so I can answer your question.

user-pic

What country did you live in Progressive Conscience?

Not the US, with the double dealing retired Generals giving MSM war commentary while also on the payroll of Pentagon contractors, the zippy Operation Iraqi Freedom news logos during the MSM war updates, the guffaws at the annual correspondents dinner when Bush cracked the joke about looking for the WMD under his desk, the shill, Jeff Gannon, given a White House press pass to ask softball questions,the incessant Bush 'terror alerts' swallowed by the media and occurring right before elections or congressional actions and based on 8-month old hearsay,(and leaving aside Helen Thomas) the MSM never did much in the way of 'challenging' Bush. That is how he and the Republicans were able to drive this nation off the cliff.

user-pic

Noble,

excellent post, and it explains why so many of the public believe Saddam had a hand in 9/11.

user-pic

Are you a progressive republican or are you a progressive democrat?

user-pic

What makes you think I'm either a Republican or a Democrat?

user-pic

Well I guess you are right-we were all living in a different country then. I thought all the media types just wanted to have a beer with George. Cuz he was just such a nice guy, doncha know.

user-pic

Anyone who thinks you are "progressive" has a strange and warped definition of progressive. Progressively robbing Palestinians of their land and killing them is actually regressive back to the most ancient eye for an eye mentality, updated only to rationalize a hundred eyes pre-emptively for an eye. Get an honest pseudonym if you want to be taken seriously and stop insulting real progressives.

user-pic

PTroub,

your post reflects on why I asked him from which side of the aisle he gets his progressivism.

user-pic

Its pretty clear from his past track record that he comes from the pretending-to-be-moderately-progressive side of the West Bank Fanatic Settler Disinformation and Deceit Aisle. Hundreds of TPM comments on the Mideast and never a single acknowledgment that anyone in Israel, other perhaps than those supporting the "self-hating" land for peace movement, might have any responsibility for the mess over there.

user-pic

There's no need to exaggerate my prolificity, Mr. Trouble. I don't have hundreds of comments on TPM by any means . . . I just joined recently.

user-pic

It's a good thing I know you are kidding, otherwise I would think you are a plant. Which presser questioned Bush himself vigorously, about his drinking, and air force record? About his AWOL? Which member of the press asked Bush about ignoring warnings for 911? Which member of the press EVER asked Bush why he flew Bin Laden's family out of the US following 911? Did one member of the press ask Bush about the male prostitute who slept over at the White House40 times? Ask Cheney about why his mob kept marshalls from questioning Cheney after he shot someone after drinking? Long enough for the alcohol level to drop? What ARE you talking about?

user-pic

Could you talk English? What's a presser?

user-pic

Have you met teh google? If you don't know what a presser is, why are you on a political blog? I mean, really.

BTW, folks, this is a troll, a glance at it's comments will tell you so.

Do as I say and not as I do and ignore it.

user-pic

*gives the chicken a high-three*

user-pic

Goshen:
While I generally agree with your premise, this statement:

"Right now, few have a Ph.D in economics and are getting pressure to produce twice the stories in half the time on topics they don't really understand much better than their audiences do."

struck me as odd.

Since when are reporters expected to have PhD's in the subjects they cover? Many first class journalists - a few (Peter Jennings comes to mind) with no more than high school diplomas - know how to ask the right questions to educate both themselves and their readers/audiences.

That's what GOOD journalists do.

Its when they don't know JOURNALISM (not economics) that we get the b.s. and "head fakes" like we saw last night.

If I wanted to read a PhD economist I'd go straight for Krugman or Galbraith or (god forbid) Greenspan.

The whole problem with this presser/cluster fuck was how bad the QUESTIONS were, not the answers.

user-pic

The PhD thing is just hyperbole dwg.

user-pic

This diary from DKOS did a wonderful job of explaining what excatly happened. I thought this was a great presser.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/3/24/712668/-Professor-Obamas-Classroom-Management-Skills

user-pic

I remember after each of the debates last fall, minutes before the results of the insta-polls were released, the anchors stated matter-of-factly that McCain won, and gave their reasons why. Then when the results showed that the public overwhelming thought Obama did better, they hurriedly tried (and failed) to reconcile that with their previous comments. It just showed how out of touch this group of elite media really are with most voters.

Last night's questions and commentary of the press conference confirms these journalists are still way out of touch. As Josh says, they're still wired to the GOP. And that is a big reason I quit watching ANY network news since about 2002. With the internet, I don't need to watch them ever.

I can't even stand to listen to NPR anymore - especially Mara Laisson, and of course Juan Williams. That news organization has really gone downhill. No wonder it's called Small Things Considered.

user-pic

I think you also have to place some blame on the Benedict Arnold Caucus which has telling the MSM that they're going to torpedo Obama's budget. They give cover to the MSM and right-wing spinmasters enabling them to frame far wing-nut ranting right as "moderate".

user-pic

"As for the rest, too bad, boys, not since FDR have you been so outmatched."

I don't know about that. JFK seemed to really enjoy the give and take of his press conferences.

user-pic

Reading all of the comments regarding Obama's press conference. The journalists especially Chip Reid and Ed Henry's questions were out of line. Ed Henry should go back to CNN and apologize for being such a jerk. Chip Reid spent time on C-SPAN the following morning giving his thoughts when he answered the caller's questions. The answers appeared to be pro-GOP. He has no idea as to the recent policies given by Obama and his administration. Maybe he should give up his job and find another line of work. Watching MSNBC you can see that Nora O'Donnel snips about anything that that Obama says or Administration does or says. She is just a water carrier for the GOP and John McCain. Everything that she has stated on air recently has been incorrect. You find this out watching the various congressional and senate hearings. Nora has also been arguing with the Democratic congressmen about what goes on in the senate. They try to tell her that they are congressmen not senators, but she keeps on going with her own dialog. I am glad to see that President Obama stands up to the "snipers" of cable news and the reporters. He call them out on their "snipping".

user-pic

To paraphrase Madeline Albright, what's the use of having an empty, toxic husk of a soul if we don't occasionally send our expensive, well-oiled military machine to shoot up faraway lands and squander the lives of our best men and women?

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Book Club Calendar

Coming Soon



Nov. 30-Dec. 4



January 12-16



« Book Club ArchiveFull calendar »

Recent Reader Posts

All Reader Posts »





Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address