« Are We Sure John McCain Is A Neocon? | Gettysburg's Blog | The Downfall of the U.S. Is Inevitable »
Los Angeles Times Is Beacon of Yellow Journalism
Can you imagine if, in 1972 and beyond, the Washington Post had opted to sit on the investigative journalism of Woodward and Bernstein? What would have happened if the Post had been allied with troubled President Richard Nixon and refused to print the scandalous findings that surely would have been a political game-changer?
Thankfully that did not happen. The Washington Post, for all of its faults, hit a proverbial grand slam with the Watergate Scandal. In contrast, the 2008 Los Angeles Times has shown, for the entire world to see, just how far the integrity of the mainstream media has plummeted in the last 30 years. I thought I had seen it all five or so years ago when the New York Times had a reporter(s) not only creating fiction in place of true journalism, but purporting to be reporting from Iraq when they were actually bottled up in their New York City apartment.
But the LA Times has hit a new low in its abject refusal to release what promises to be a controversial and game-changing video of Barack Obama toasting one of his controversial friends in the PLO. It's not so much that it could help John McCain. Most of us want McCain staying right where he is -- in the U.S. Senate chamber. But if the LA Times is willing to sacrifice wholly its journalistic integrity to protect a politician, what are the American people to make of that? It honestly sounds like something straight out of Al Jazeera.
For its part, the LA Times cites a promise it made to its "source" that it would not make public the video. This would be akin to George W. Bush, at his farewell address, saying that all of the mistakes made during his presidency were purely the result of "bad advice." For one, I've never heard of a "source" giving a damning piece of evidence to a newspaper unless they wanted it exposed to public scrutiny. Second, look at what Woodward and Bernstein were able to accomplish without EVER compromising the most famous source ever, Deepthroat.
But perhaps the most damning thing is that the mainstream media, as shown here by the LA Times, has sunk into the same cesspool of treachury, mistruth, and yellow journalism that has drowned the White House over the last 8 years. It shows that the "progressives" have fallen to the same level as Fox News.
Obama talks a lot about change. But as time goes on, more and more things remain the same.
Thankfully that did not happen. The Washington Post, for all of its faults, hit a proverbial grand slam with the Watergate Scandal. In contrast, the 2008 Los Angeles Times has shown, for the entire world to see, just how far the integrity of the mainstream media has plummeted in the last 30 years. I thought I had seen it all five or so years ago when the New York Times had a reporter(s) not only creating fiction in place of true journalism, but purporting to be reporting from Iraq when they were actually bottled up in their New York City apartment.
But the LA Times has hit a new low in its abject refusal to release what promises to be a controversial and game-changing video of Barack Obama toasting one of his controversial friends in the PLO. It's not so much that it could help John McCain. Most of us want McCain staying right where he is -- in the U.S. Senate chamber. But if the LA Times is willing to sacrifice wholly its journalistic integrity to protect a politician, what are the American people to make of that? It honestly sounds like something straight out of Al Jazeera.
For its part, the LA Times cites a promise it made to its "source" that it would not make public the video. This would be akin to George W. Bush, at his farewell address, saying that all of the mistakes made during his presidency were purely the result of "bad advice." For one, I've never heard of a "source" giving a damning piece of evidence to a newspaper unless they wanted it exposed to public scrutiny. Second, look at what Woodward and Bernstein were able to accomplish without EVER compromising the most famous source ever, Deepthroat.
But perhaps the most damning thing is that the mainstream media, as shown here by the LA Times, has sunk into the same cesspool of treachury, mistruth, and yellow journalism that has drowned the White House over the last 8 years. It shows that the "progressives" have fallen to the same level as Fox News.
Obama talks a lot about change. But as time goes on, more and more things remain the same.
Advertisement
FYI - CNN and all other factcheck outlets have debunked the assertions about this 'meeting'.
LA Times is protecting a confidential source which is what all media/journalists should do and which the court uphelds.
Before you go forward and stir the pot, wouldn't it serve you and all better to make sure you know EXACTLY what's in that pot?!?
Truth and facts only, NOT supposition, allegations and/or personal agenda bents are allowed, wanted or needed by those who care about integrity of the post.
Check the facts, then we'll talk.
Nothing to see here folks, proceed to another blog.
October 29, 2008 11:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
What blabber could you possibly be talking about? Somebody doesn't give a NEWSPAPER a piece of evidence unless they intend for it to be proliferated. Any argument to the contrary would be akin to handing an IRS agent a fraudulent tax return in the understanding that he won't bust you for it.
Come on, people, be realistic here. Stop drinking the Kool Aid.
Facts? The facts are simple. Rashid Khalidi worked for the Palestine Liberation Organization. The PLO is designated by the U.S. government as a terrorist organization. At a banquet, Barack Obama toasts Khalidi and the two partake in disparaging rhetoric regarding both U.S. foreign policy and Israeli policy.
This is not a Republican talking point. I find it humorous that whenever ANYONE says ANYTHING negative about Obama, his supporters dismiss it out of hand and claim that it's nothing more than a Republican smear.
For the record, I am not a John McCain supporter. Your assertion that I am just proves your own unflinching bias and unwavering ignorance.
October 30, 2008 12:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
F A C T C H E C K
When people resort to personal negative attacks (as in your response 'unwavering ignorance', et al.) instead of citing their sources (documents, names, etc.) and putting forth a valid foundation with same, it is always a tactic to either a.) divert away from their inability to substantitate their claim with credible facts and documents OR b.) attempt to cause negative reaction and create lack of focus on the need to validate their own flawed assertions.
There's a (c.) too, but I won't go there as I try to honor Obama's request that we be respectful even when communicating with those who are not.
October 30, 2008 2:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
You can only know this as a fact if you had spoken to the person that gave the LA Times said tape.
October 30, 2008 7:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
jsfox
Why else would somebody give a major newspaper a piece of videotape if they never intended for it to be distributed? Why would you do that? Was it simply a gift to the reporter? Something he could take home at night and enjoy with a cold beer?
Forget the IRS analogy I made, this would be like taking your kids to McDonald's (or wherever their favorite food place happens to be) and telling them that they cannot order anything. They just need sit there and look and do nothing.
Come on!
Secondly, if there is nothing questionable about the nature of what Obama said in the clip, why is there a reluctance to make it public record? If there's nothing to hide, who cares? In fact, if there's nothing controversial about the clip, the Times could make John McCain and Sarah Palin look pretty damn foolish for all of the slamming they did on the Times yesterday.
October 30, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Haven't found any evidence of Rashidi working for PLO. He is a partisan for Palestinians, though. Guess that makes him evil.
October 30, 2008 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Can you type the links to those debunking pieces you mention? I'd love to use them as weapons against Obama haters.
October 30, 2008 6:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well said, Aunt Sam!
If Gettysburg was really interested in the facts, he/she would have read the story about the going away party published by the LA Times in April.
But he/she would rather read the McCain talking points --- your lips are moving -- and imitate Sean Hannity than find the truth.
October 29, 2008 11:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
So Barack Obama attended a banquet for a guy that John McCain gave $500,000+ to? It's not like Obama sent a 1/2 million his way. Shouldn't you be directing your invective towards the McCain campaign?
October 30, 2008 12:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
astral 66:
Sorry, but Democratic Underground and Free Republic are not exactly what we would call "credible sources of information." If they are, can you imagine what the Weekly Standard has to say about this mess?
October 30, 2008 12:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'll tell you what. Why don't you fact check the facts on this? Do some research about McCain's time in the IRI.
If you look at the IRI's tax return you will see the grant that was given. If you do the research you will find that McCain served as chairman of IRI. The tax return is just a fact.
Seriously you manner indicates that you don't have a passion for facts and we are open to facts around here.
You dismiss real facts but want to go witch hunting that there is something, just something that happened at a party that you could hold against Senator Obama. I think that is pretty ridiculous.
October 30, 2008 12:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Cmon, Gettysburg, get some perspective. Be grateful they are still open and able to deliver something, anything. It's going to be hopeless for a decade. Blog triumphalism lives, many probably jumping happy happy joy joy that L.A. Times' newsroom just lost 75 more, "leaving it approximately half the size it was just seven years ago." You think L.A. Times is "yellow" for this one transgression you see, soon we are going to be treated to virtually no well-funded foreign news bureaus anywhere, and if all those Dem Undergrounders want to keep posting links to news stories, like when that next bomb goes off or tsunami occurs or whatever, they may be subjected to seeking out the stylings of the Pakistani or Somali or Russian or Chinese equivalent of Joe the Plumber trying his hand at reportin'. We are looking forward to, as "Maynard" once posted here: citizen journalism on teh intarweb. You haven't seen anything yellow yet compared to the foreseeable future, you're going to be seeing nothing but yellow if people don't start supporting some of these newspapers instead of bashing them.
October 30, 2008 12:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
With you on the value of newspapers. My big three are NYT, WaPo, and LAT. I would pay subscription for all three, and did for a year at NYT.
October 30, 2008 1:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well said.
October 30, 2008 1:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is one of the most serious issues we'll be facing in the next decade. Who is going to be watching the people in charge if the newspapers go down? Who is going to be our eyes and ears. Even bad or biased reporting is better than no reporting at all. Most of the websites do absolutely no reporting at all. They just link and comment on the articles in the major newspapers.
What's going to replace the newspapers? TV? Its more shallow than the newspapers. Several cable news channels going 24 7 and instead of depth they repeat the same superficial crap a dozen times a day. They don't need to censor information if there's nobody paying anybody to investigate.
October 30, 2008 1:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here is the tax return. Look on page 14 for Grant No. 5180, West Bank: CPRS (Center for Palestinian Research Studies) in the amount of $448,873.
Page 17 shows McCain as the Chair of International Republican Institute. He still is the Chair of IRI, in fact.
My understanding is that Rashid Khalidi is about as controversial as a bag of potatoes.
October 30, 2008 1:36 AM | Reply | Permalink