Note To The Traditional Media: HELLO! WE'RE HERE AND YOU SUCK!!

Your days are numbered.

People will always flock to the better product. And as far as information goes, nothing beats the internets. Yes, it has it's problems, sometimes it's like a bunch of monkeys on acid let loose in a Crystal meth lab, but it's superiority is still unquestioned. The days when someone just talks AT you are gone. People have tasted interactivity and CHOICE and there's no going back. Deal with it, it's called progress and it's as unstoppable as a wiz after a bender.

So all you Howie Kurtz's who refuse to recongnize your own ideology:

"But what if journalists are part of an unspoken conspiracy to inflate Rove’s importance — not for ideological reasons but because it makes for a better narrative? What if they are the architects, using well-placed aides to build a stage for inside-dope stories involving Rove and his colleagues?"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/19/AR2007081901418.html

--snip--

And all you supposed Journalism Professors like Michael Kube who can't be bothered to fact check:

"No man but a blockhead," the stubbornly sensible Samuel Johnson said, "ever wrote but for money." Yet here are people, whole brigades of them, happy to write for free. And not just write. Many of the most active bloggers -- Andrew Sullivan, Matthew Yglesias, Joshua Micah Marshall and the contributors to the Huffington Post -- are insistent partisans in political debate."

--snip--

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-op-skube19aug19,0,1667466.story?coll=la-news-comment

From TPM:

--snip--
Perhaps I'm naive. But it surprises me a great deal that a professor of journalism freely admits that he allows to appear under his own name claims about a publication he concedes he's never read.

Actually, if you look at what he says, it seems Skube's editor at the Times oped page didn't think he had enough specific examples in his article decrying our culture of free-wheeling assertion bereft of factual backing. Or perhaps any examples. So the editor came up with a few blogs to mention and Skube signed off. And Skube was happy to sign off on the addition even though he didn't know anything about them.

--snip--

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/024644.php

--snip--

And all you Judith Miller's and Bob Novak's and on and on, all I have to say is you should be embarrassed and ashamed. You all probably wonder what it is you're doing wrong and why your losing so many subscribers and so much market share and so much respect. So you attack and you make excuses and you create strawmen and in essence, you behave pretty much like the criminals you are covering for through your obsequious cowardice and your deliberate and malignant lies and misrepresentations. "How DARE the rabble find a voice! How DARE they threaten our alabaster thrones! WE are the arbiters of truth and opinion! It's always been that way!"

People are flocking to the superior information product because they have a thirst for the truth, not bullshit wrapped in incompetency.

All I can say is buh bye dinosaur. We'll see you in the rear-view mirror and shed a dry tear. Oh, and don't forget to fuck off.

.

...so much for bein' MAD AS HELL AND NOT TAKIN' IT ANYMORE. :nopity:



We deal in illusion, man! None of
it's true! But you people sit there
-- all of you -- day after day, night
after night, all ages, colors, creeds
-- we're all you know. You're
beginning to believe this illusion
we're spinning here.

You're beginning to think the tube is reality
and your own lives are unreal. You
do whatever the tube tells you. You
dress like the tube, you eat like
the tube, you raise your children
like the tube, you think like the
tube. This is mass madness, you
maniacs! In God's name, you people
are the real thing! We're the illu-
sions! So turn off this goddam
set! Turn it off right now! Turn
it off and leave it off. Turn it
off right now, right in the middle
of this very sentence I'm speaking
now --

At which point, HOWARD BEALE, sweating and red-eyed with
his prophetic rage, collapses to the floor in a pro-
phetic swoon.

...Television continues relentlessly on.




http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=1559573

:hi:

Gee a good lesson for pretty much all of them, except Olbermann, and the so-called "fake" journalists Stewart and Colbert.

It's to make us not look like the Free Republic around here.

"recongnize" -- is that like "recognize"?

Likewise, there's a big difference between "your" (meaning something that belongs to you) and "you're" (meaning an abbreviation for "you are").

Or "Yes, it has it's problems, sometimes it's like ....". The second "it's" is correct, the first one not so much.

Likewise, "Judith Miller's" means something belonging to Judith Miller, not everyone who is like Judith Miller. ("Judith Millers")

Come on, guys. This is getting mighty old. I've seen folks misspell "Texas" around here lately. So if we're really going to "be the media", let's write like we know the English language.

And Beetwasher, this isn't meant just for you. But this rant has been building up in me for a while and this OP just brought it to a head. Let's all just take a minute to edit what we put out BECAUSE what we say is important and how we present our arguments goes a long way toward determining whether those arguments are given the serious attention they deserve. (Rant off)

:evilgrin:

... but during the two years I have been around here, I've never noticed the need for a little editing fore-thought before posting as I have in the past few weeks. Again, these comments aren't directed just at Beetwasher and I don't plan to join any "police" now or ever (since I just got out of a federal Bureau of Prisons halfway house).

But seriously, folks, it doesn't take much effort to edit what we post before posting it. I have always been very pleased at the level of discourse here on DU and would like us to shy away from anything that looks like Freeper English. (Actually, present company excepted, that's generally been one way I have recognized temporary "visitors" to DUWorld in the past -- there missspeld wurds giv thim uwuy.)

But hey, there's nothing hugh about my comments, so don't take them too seriesly.

in a post replete with elementary misspellings and grammar errors.

Not saying some of the MSM aren't guilty of that too, but before you pick the speck out of your brother's eye, etc., etc.

And yes, the MSM have their problems, but to condemn them collectively is to throw out the baby with the bath water. There are still a few good apples out there, and too many people on the Internet either aren't familiar with or don't care about ethical reporting principles for me to depend on it entirely as my source of "reliable" news.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Someone's head is going to roll! :eyes:

Pathetic.

What's ironic is your shallow criticism of my post. Talk about throwing the baby out w/ the bathwater. As if a few minor spelling errors should invalidate the whole thing.

I didn't "throw the baby out w/ the bathwater", I posted some specific examples of awful journalism. I didn't say the were ALL bad, show me where I did that. But then again, anyone who has a minimum amount of reading comprehension ability already knew that.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

And it's not to begin sentences. But I suppose you already knew that. :evilgrin:

I 'pprecicate it. (Now where's that "check spelling" button? Oh well, when your hot, your hot ....)

I don't have a "sarcasm" smilie on my computer, but I thought the misspelled word was a dead giveaway. Oh well, when your not, your not ....

(Besides, the Jerry Reed song used the word "you're" rather than "you are".)

But since you're such an expert at everything and have an unstoppable urge to correct people's grammar and spelling, shouldn't you already know that? How Ironic that the Net Nanny doesn't know how to do this:

:sarcasm:

That's not "on my computer", jeenyus.

Now it's time to get back to more important things than bantering with a self-described "a**-hole". No wonder you carry so much anger around with you -- I'm sure it makes it hard to worry about droll things like spelling and grammar.

Have a nice life. Really.

Get to work! Have a shitty life. Really. (At least I'm honest).

And pathetic. Spelling and grammar flames, how droll.

A brief comment on your content: I spend most of my time here in the "Election Reform" forum. While I would agree with you that the corporate media is failing us at this moment in so many ways, I am also thankful for people like Robert Koehler, Keith Olbermann, Robert Kennedy, Jr. -- even Lou Dobbs and Dan Rather -- for taking the issue of election integrity seriously and giving it attention in media outlets that range beyond DU. They have helped keep this issue alive.

That is all. Have a nice day.

Not having any worthwhile to add to the conversation! Still batting 0. That is all. Have a shitty day.

What? No more grammar or spelling flames? I'm so disappointed.

:woohoo:

And all you Judith Miller's and Bob Novak's and on and on, all I have to say is you should be embarrassed and ashamed. You all probably wonder what it is you're doing wrong and why your losing so many subscribers and so much market share and so much respect. So you attack and you make excuses and you create strawmen and in essence, you behave pretty much like the criminals you are covering for through your obsequious cowardice and your deliberate and malignant lies and misrepresentations. "How DARE the rabble find a voice! How DARE they threaten our alabaster thrones! WE are the arbiters of truth and opinion! It's always been that way!"

People are flocking to the superior information product because they have a thirst for the truth, not bullshit wrapped in incompetency.

All I can say is buh bye dinosaur. We'll see you in the rear-view mirror and shed a dry tear. Oh, and don't forget to fuck off.

Kick and recommend. There is still some time, though, until internet media - meaning undernet internet media, not major outlets - is producing it's own material to such a degree that it can replace the 'mass media' as we know it. The best solution IMHO is a combination, like here at the DU and in the blogosphere, where the news that is buried is picked up and re-launched, and placed into context thru open debate. What is truly vicious is not propaganda, but the monopoly of it, as stated in this interesting article about Nazi Germany's propaganda, written in 1942 as it happened. The mass media of today has failed on diversity of opinion, and the one-sided opinion that exists is mixed with news content to a disgusting degree, so that you have no way of knowing what is true and what is not.

(Mass) Media reform should come through ownership reform (controlled by public scrutiny), and also through loss of ownership to 'professional' news content once produced, making it publicly available to the internet community for free use in debate without having to take into consideration the copyrights. The last is already a more or less unspoken rule. Finally, the interference from communication companies as propaganda producers should be addressed, by opening up and making public their secret vaults of campaigns both in traditional media and now also in internet media. You can lie to the public to sell an ice cream or Coca Cola, but you can't lie to the public to sell a war, or scare the public into accepting radical political change by amplifying the impact of terror, or inducing it to happen. Communication companies are very attractive for the intelligence agencies, and I think we can say without overstating anything, that the use of propaganda by those entities is out of control. Ownership reform, content release and media lobbyism scrutiny would be the three areas to focus on, of course in addition to the already massive work being done in producing internet news, blogs and debate today. And by keeping the internet open and free!

--we still have to get a secure funding base for real investigative journalism.

And you should know that the journo professor's name is "Skube" not "Kube." Otherwise, dip it in bronze.

The editing timed out before I had a chance to fix it. Thanks!

Wow there was a shocker huh?

BTW- Froomkin is by far the best thing going on traditional print (with Matt Tiabbi at Rolling Stone and the Rudepundit in the not so traditional media category) EJ Dionne has his moments of letting the realy cocktail party banter escaped the beltway.

Traditional media are either the only ones who don't know that their days are numbered OR they really are that soused and rudderless without their daily confirmation --see this from my journal

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/underpants/90

"With Imus and his crew no longer on TV professional poker players no longer have someone who looks less healthy than they do."

:rofl: :thumbsup:

No wonder that so many people (like my mother) have a bassackwards view of world events if the only news that they get is from television or newspapers. And why anyone at all voted for Bush*...:crazy:

We do watch a lot of TV news here, as well as belonging to DU and subscribing to numerous liberal e-mail newsletters, but, thanks to the internets, we're aware of the truth and frequently yell at the TV, in frustration... *sigh* x(

the information in these archived threads CAN BE USED FOR INDICTMENTS AND IMPEACHMENT
here's a whole armory of them
(from 6-13-2007)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1104149