Lehrer guest: Two possible reasons why DSM under-reported (one hopeful)

In an overall interesting segment, the ombudsman for the NY Times was asked why DSM was not receving a lot of press. He said two possible reasons: 1) the memo surfaced in the context of a British election and the journalists covering that were aware of it but didn't think to tell the rest of the news office (unlikely), and 2) SOMETIMES THERE ISN'T A LOT WRITTEN ABOUT A STORY BECAUSE THERE IS MUCH MORE DETAIL TO COME THAT WILL BE WRITTEN ABOUT EXTENSIVELY.

The host then asked if he had any evidence for #2. The guest looked at the ceiling, sighed, and said "no," as though it was a tough decision to say that, and that he said he hoped it would be #2.

The other guest from the WP didn't know why DSM hasn't received more coverage.

I'm saying that this exchange hinted at something big coming down the pike. Now....whether it's something that appears to validate what Beavis and Butthead said during their joint conference yesterday...OR...if it is something that ties together all the evidence we have seen out there that shows massive deception, we'll have to see. I CHOOSE TO BELIEVE THE LATTER....fits with what I understand the facts to be, and to be honest I'm parched for some hope.

Another interesting article that was discussed was from March 2003 in the NYT by Risen that stated that CIA intelligence felt pressure to cook intelligence. The NYT guy said that the article was very important but was buried by war news and by editors hopped up on war.

Also interesting was that they said the interviews took place before the Deep Throat revelation. Sort of makes me wonder if news orgs were glad for the Deep Throat diversion.

Starting with the 2000 election fraud. The pre 9/11 knowledge and cover up. The lies about all the reasons to go to war. The Exxon fiasco and rip off of California and the black outs. The Plame outing. Bush's lack of real military service.

It goes on and on. Some DUer gets excited that finally something will bring them down and it never does and the public doesn't care.

The media is impotent when it comes to screwing this administration.

I have never in my life seen a press so unwilling to go after a sitting President.

I suspect we are past the point where we can process a major scandal in an honest way, due to media complicity, polarization (no accident), and the public's unwillingness to see that our government is dysfunctional.

But every once in a while I allow myself to choose to believe that something will work out. Feels good for a while and I get to post something that doesnt' resemble a wet blanket.

Last time I hoped for something real was the dem compromise on judicial nominations. I thought the dems had a strong hand and that they agreed not to fillibuster in exchange for torpedoing some of these horrendous nominations. Didn't happen, we got hosed. Before that, I was thinking that all our dem leaders would join Boxer in not voting to certify Ohio electoral votes. Nay. The time before that was after the election, when I had hoped that Kerry was playing the good sport, but actually had plans to expose election fraud and take control again. Didn't happen. Abu Ghraib didn't happen. Edmonds didn't happen, Plame. Enron. Halliburton. Environmental disaster. Medicare lies. 700 million unauthorized transfer. 8 billion missing. 9/11 commission. US shown to be complicit in UN oil for food. Galloway.

Damn... guess I'm a cynic again.

I had to do something and missed some of that, now I know what I missed. I like the PBS News they actually have real news. PBS News, Frontline and a few other shows make it worth donating a few bucks to PBS.

and that it's here in the U.S. it's been largely ignored, with supposedly inexplicable "lack of interest" from American citizens. One hypothesis was that we've all already "made up our minds" about the war (yeah, with a majority of Bush voters completely devoid of facts, polls have shown), hence our media considered it unimportant.

What's important here is Michael Jackson. And one white woman missing in Aruba. And whatever "reality" TV show is in vogue, and fashion makeovers, and God knows what.

Personally, I think the American electorate has never been so STUPID and I think the corporate media, and its collusion with rightwing government, wants it that way.

(Hear that, Freepers?!)

And what's ironic is that the people being lied to are the freepers, conservatives, and ditto heads. The GOP and administration isn't lying to US...we know the facts because we do research. Their own party is lying to them, not us...their own party is controlling them, not us.

is BOGUS, and begs the question, "So what's the excuse THIS week?!"

said - get this - the news media was weary of the Iraq War. And that this news was in the past. The big story was what is happening now and in the future of the Iraq war.

Yeah, like we viewers aren't weary of Michael Jackson and the missing white woman of the month club.

:wtf: Is this about their entertainment or something?!?

Was Aaron saying that to criticize the media or to excuse it? (I used to be practically pen-pals with him, but that stopped during the election campaigns.)

said it.

I'm watching the repeat now - Aaron said some, some were wondering why the DSM wasn't getting more attention here.

Jeff Greenfield said it got more attention in UK cause of election, and not here because the Presidential campaign was over months ago.

And O' Neill and Clarke reported this months ago.

But Greenfield said the real value of the DSM was to reinforce current doubts about Iraq.

Especially when they're "weary" of reporting on an unnecessary, irresponsible war, without a cause or a plan, that's costing us billions of dollars, thousands of lives, uncounted injuries, and the credibility of the entire world.

But I guess they're not "weary" of Michael Jackson!! Is it about them, or their ratings, or what?! Where are the Walter Cronkite's, and Huntley-Brinkley's, and all those people my parents used to watch during Vietnam? Where are the Woodward and Bernstein's of today? Imagine if all they'd done was report on the trials and tribulations of the Monkees, or investigated local crimes involving pretty young white women, or put out the daily blast-faxes of the Nixon White House.

It STILL wouldn't be this bad, because BushCo is far, far worse than Nixon et al ever thought of being.

the point was also made about how badlyl Iraq is going. The whitewash was made on DSM, but at the expense of some honesty on the Iraq situation.

Even if a media outlet is waiting on DSM authenticity or a hard copy (guffaw), there are tons of related articles, interviews, books, and other sources that could be researched and written about RIGHT NOW!

This is a gigantic story much larger than DSM! Yet it is all about that one document. Sounds very familiar.

Don't the American People have to hear about it before we can make up our minds?? Oh right... I keep forgetting... this Administration feels a thinking well informed society is bad.

:eyes:

overtime covering their tracks, along with Blair's. The media is giving them time in order to rebut and invent bogus material.
Then it will be fed to the sheeple as if it were only an internet conspiracy. They are already revising history. But, we can hope!

because you will have to lie to cover a lie, and then lie to cover that lie and so on, and soon there are too many lies to keep track.

And we have someone like Conyers, and thousands of people across this country keeping track and uncovering and documenting the lies. Soon it has to come that last lie that will tip the scale, and dump it all out into the open.

One can hope, that in this case Mom was right.

After seeing CBS and Newsweek chewed up, I think the media is afraid to go too far with the DSM for fear of being the next victim.