"Old Media" taking a hit thanks to "Bush Bashing" bathroom note

[Taco John]

ROFL I found this searching Google and I had to laugh... I was busting a gut at the conclusions that the writer drew... "His childish attack means old media takes another hit." I was thinking, "Man, what a poorly written piece, and what a wild conclusion. Sounds like some of the moronic stuff I've read over at the Planet."

And then I saw the byline! ROFL

http://www.nationalledger.com/scribe/article_2726741.shtml

[NewPhin]

Too funny that MM wrote that.

That being said:
I freaking hate, hate, hate the whole PS journalism. It's bad ethics and people need to watch their asses doing it. I realize they just "enhanced" what was there, but it's still not cool.

Now...that being said:
I understand why they did it. I don't think it's malicious. I just think it's funny as hell.

[Taco John]

I have zero problems with enhancement for clarity or legibility. I don't know why anyone would.

[NewPhin]

I have zero problems with enhancement for clarity or legibility. I don't know why anyone would.


That's true. It's not like they're taking John Kerry and Jane Fonda and photoshopping them into a scene together with the intention of misleading the public. Of course...no one would ever do that. Would they?

[|Zach|]

Thgouth this was pretty inetersting as I read over it today.

http://www.rhetorica.net/

Hello! Liberals! Where are you?...

[Ed. Note: The following also applies if you substitute "conservative" for "liberal," although the specific example is liberal.]

According to the liberal bias "theory" of the mainstream media ("__" because is isn't one), this should be front-page news everywhere. But it's not. Hmmmmmmm... Someone explain to me how it is The New York Times and the Washington Post didn't splash this all over their front pages.

If the journalists at these newspapers are liberal--meaning, consequently, that they do what they do based on political considerations first--then the still unverified nature of the story should not have kept them from playing it up. If you're out to push the liberal agenda, who gives a rip if it isn't nailed down from "both sides"? If you're out to push a liberal agenda, who cares if the correspondents who claim to have witnessed the events contribute to an overtly biased publication? If you're out to push a liberal agenda, isn't it enough that the implications of this story help you prove that American society is racist and the Old South mentality still hasn't been brought to heel? If you're out to push a liberal agenda, doesn't this recall (among other things) Selma, Kent State, and Chicago 1968? (Note: anaphora and rhetorical question combination. Why am I telling you this?)

[Ed. note: This story should be reported, but it should not be published until verified. Mayor Nagin's quote could be considered verification. But it appears there's been very little follow-up, i.e. "Tell us Mayor Nagin, how do you know _____"? If any Rhetorica reader has seen a follow-up, please post the link in a comment. Note that this CNN story quotes Bradshaw, one of the correspondents for The Socialist Worker. One might be tempted to claim that publishing anything at all is liberal bias. But all you'd have is an anecdote that doesn't stand up to how we might reasonably (assuming you want to be reasonable) expect a truly liberal press to behave.]

[Ed. Note: This is a great "story" (re: narrative bias) no matter what your politics. Cops holding back African-Americans fleeing a disaster by blockading a bridge and shooting over their heads! That's drama! It even has a great symbol of racist struggle--a bridge. It's a great story if you feel for the displaced. It's a great story if you think the cops heroically held off a mob. It's a great story if you if you think situations like these are always more complicated and complex than usually portrayed in the press. There's just no way this isn't a great story--assuming its true.]

I'm a liberal. And just as Mr. Spock was in control of his emotions, I'm in (at least a certain measure) of control of my ideologies (because of my awareness of the role ideology plays in human cognition--an awareness I suppose most reasonable people possess). If I were publishing a newspaper and allowed myself to be guided by my liberal ideology, I'd be splashing this story all over the front page. And I'd beat that horse until is was dead dead dead.

Jay Rosen is 100 percent correct: The media bias debate is dumb dumb dumb.

(Well, not really. It's a rhetorical and political maneuver that's working (See paragraph above, re: "I'm a liberal.") By saying it's dumb--I can't speak for Rosen here--what I'm saying is that it does not conform to a reasonable understanding of how the press actually works. The folks pushing the political bias debate from the right and left don't care about how the press actually works. They simply wish to win politically. Lord knows there's plenty wrong with how the press actually works to keep critics' ears steaming. But political (right or left) bias isn't one of those problems. Or, rather, bias is a byproduct of other phenomena, i.e. other problems.)

A reminder:

Journalists, too, speak from political positions but usually not overtly so. The journalistic ethics of objectivity and fairness are strong influences on the profession. But journalistic objectivity is not the pristine objectivity of philosophy. Instead, a journalist attempts to be objective by two methods: 1) fairness to those concerned with the news and 2) a professional process of information gathering that seeks fairness, completeness, and accuracy. As we all know, the ethical heights journalists set for themselves are not always reached. But, all in all, like politics, it is an honorable profession practiced, for the most part, by people trying to do the right thing.

The press is often thought of as a unified voice with a distinct bias (right or left depending on the critic). This simplistic thinking fits the needs of ideological struggle, but is hardly useful in coming to a better understanding of what is happening in the world. I believe journalism is an under-theorized practice. In other words, journalists often do what they do without reflecting upon the meaning of the premises and assumptions that support their practice. I say this as a former journalist. I think we may begin to reflect upon journalistic practice by noticing that the press applies a narrative structure to ambiguous events in order to create a coherent and causal sense of events.

...

I have asserted that some critics of the press think of it as speaking with a unified voice with a distinct ideological bias. I have further asserted that this simplistic thinking fits the needs of ideological struggle, but is hardly useful in coming to a better understanding of what is happening in the world. For that better understanding we need a theory.

A theory offers us a model that tells us why things happen as they do. Further, a theory allows us to predict outcomes and behavior. Assertions of ideological bias do neither. While we can expect the press to demonstrate ideological biases in regard to certain issues or other localized phenomena, these and other behaviors are explained and predicted by the structural biases. Since the press sometimes demonstrates a conservative bias, asserting that the press is liberal neither predicts nor explains. Since the press sometimes demonstrates a liberal bias, asserting that the press is conservative neither predicts nor explains.

[Ed Note: Don't accuse me of pushing publication of this story or even believing it. Re-read the second paragraph carefully...and this.]

(Lack of verification can create the effect of a political bias. It happens "both" ways. Why do I spend more time fighting the liberal variety? The answer may be found in the parenthetical thought above. Hint: It has nothing to do with my political ideology, although that may be an effective counter-argument (politically) to claim otherwise. But, then, how would one justify the notion that would have to obtain: That political ideology trumps other ideology.)

[Taco John]

That's true. It's not like they're taking John Kerry and Jane Fonda and photoshopping them into a scene together with the intention of misleading the public. Of course...no one would ever do that. Would they?



Now you're talking about a whole different thing...

[Taco John]

I find this media bias thing to be nothing more than a bunch of pussies crying when their "side" gets exposed. The left cries it's a right wing media. The right cries it's a left wing media. And the biggest pussies are the ones crying the loudest.

Shrill bitches.

[Phobia]

Where the hell has CK been? I haven't seen him for a while.

[NewPhin]

Where the hell has CK been? I haven't seen him for a while.

Obviously writing stories about Condi and W. passing notes. Duh!

[go bowe]

bush is da debil...

[Pitt Gorilla]

Wow, now that is some sh!tty writing. Give him the benefit of the doubt and assume someone else wrote it and slapped his name on it.

[Taco John]

Anyone remember when the AP ran this one?

http://carcino.gen.nz/images/image.phpi/259a2965/clinton_boat.jpg&cb=1115204527

I wonder if CK spent much time bellowing about this terrible "attack."


Me? I laugh at them both for what they are: humorous.

[the Talking Can]

it's funny that MM thinks he's media.....ouch...I still don't know how he types with Bush's balls on his chin...

[Taco John]

Lost in all this: why the hell does the most powerful man in America have to ask Condi if he can go to the bathroom?

[the Talking Can]

Lost in all this: why the hell does the most powerful man in America have to ask Condi if he can go to the bathroom?

because he knows Rove will say no?

[Boozer]

Wow, now that is some sh!tty writing. Give him the benefit of the doubt and assume someone else wrote it and slapped his name on it.

The photo of President George W. Bush writing a note about taking a bathroom break during a session at the United Nations on Wednesday was enhanced with a photoshop program according to Reuters.


How many clauses can we count between the subject and the (passive voice) verb?

[go bowe]

How many clauses can we count between the subject and the (passive voice) verb?four? :shrug:

[|Zach|]

How many clauses can we count between the subject and the (passive voice) verb?
ROFL

[Boozer]

four? :shrug:

I think you might be a couple short.

[|Zach|]

I think you might be a couple short.
Thats as high as I count.

[Radar Chief]

Thats as high as I count.

Aw come on dude, surely you can count to at least 10. 20 if you pull your shoes off, 21 if you drop your pants. ;)

[|Zach|]

Aw come on dude, surely you can count to at least 10. 20 if you pull your shoes off, 21 if you drop your pants. ;)
http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/learning/emptyhead.gif

[Boozer]

Thats as high as I count.

I guess I keep losing track. Keeping in mind my usually shitty writing, and the fact that I haven't explicitly studied grammar since high school, here's my breakdown:

"of President George W. Bush" (modifying "photo")
"writing a note" (modifying "President George W. Bush")
"about taking a bathroom break" (modifying "note")
"during a session" (modifying..."writing?")
"at the United Nations" (modifying "session")
"on Wednesday" (same)

You could probably combine some of these. Heck, you could string them all together to make one big clause modifying "photo" if you were so inclined, but that might make it difficult to read.

[|Zach|]

I guess I keep losing track. Keeping in mind my usually shitty writing, and the fact that I haven't explicitly studied grammar since high school, here's my breakdown:

"of President George W. Bush" (modifying "photo")
"writing a note" (modifying "President George W. Bush")
"about taking a bathroom break" (modifying "note")
"during a session" (modifying..."writing?")
"at the United Nations" (modifying "session")
"on Wednesday" (same)

You could probably combine some of these. Heck, you could string them all together to make one big clause modifying "photo" if you were so inclined, but that might make it difficult to read.
How are things going for you job wise?

[Boozer]

How are things going for you job wise?

Signed, sealed, and delivered to the firm I worked for in Phoenix this summer. Provided I graduate, I'll start work after Labor Day 2006. All that's standing in my way are 25 credit hours and a bar exam.

[|Zach|]

Signed, sealed, and delivered to the firm I worked for in Phoenix this summer. Provided I graduate, I'll start work after Labor Day 2006. All that's standing in my way are 25 credit hours and a bar exam.
Awesome, thats great man.

Must be exciting.

[Boozer]

Awesome, thats great man.

Must be exciting.

Thanks. It's exciting, but it's also a year away.

[go bowe]

Signed, sealed, and delivered to the firm I worked for in Phoenix this summer. Provided I graduate, I'll start work after Labor Day 2006. All that's standing in my way are 25 credit hours and a bar exam.i assume that's the arizona bar exam...

you might want to consider taking the kansas bar exam too...

who knows what the future will bring (even 20 years later)?

you could possibly move home at some point in time, and it would come in handy...

plus it's a lot easier to pass the bar exam when you're young and fresh out of school...

i know, it damn near killed my to pass the missouri bar at the age of 44...

i'm pretty sure i wouldn't pass now if i tried it again without a study course...

hey, congratulations on the job gig...

it makes the 3rd year a lot less stressful when you already have a job in hand...

i know... :D :D :D

[go bowe]

I guess I keep losing track. Keeping in mind my usually shitty writing, and the fact that I haven't explicitly studied grammar since high school, here's my breakdown:

"of President George W. Bush" (modifying "photo")
"writing a note" (modifying "President George W. Bush")
"about taking a bathroom break" (modifying "note")
"during a session" (modifying..."writing?")
"at the United Nations" (modifying "session")
"on Wednesday" (same)

You could probably combine some of these. Heck, you could string them all together to make one big clause modifying "photo" if you were so inclined, but that might make it difficult to read.ok, now...

some of those things are prepositional phrases, not clauses...

if there's no verb, it's generally a phrase...

writing a note, taking a break are clauses...

of president and at the u.n. are definitely prepositional phrases...

during a session looks like an adverb...

and on wednesday looks like a looks like an adjective...

are there such things as adverbial phrases and adjective phrases?

or are "during" and "on" prepositions?

i can't remember most of this stuff...

[Boozer]

ok, now...

some of those things are prepositional phrases, not clauses...

if there's no verb, it's generally a phrase...

writing a note, taking a break are clauses...

of president and at the u.n. are definitely prepositional phrases...

during a session looks like an adverb...

and on wednesday looks like a looks like an adjective...

are there such things as adverbial phrases and adjective phrases?

or are "during" and "on" prepositions?

i can't remember most of this stuff...

That sounds vaguely familiar...I think you're mostly rite.
/intentional

[Boozer]

i assume that's the arizona bar exam...

you might want to consider taking the kansas bar exam too...

who knows what the future will bring (even 20 years later)?

you could possibly move home at some point in time, and it would come in handy...

plus it's a lot easier to pass the bar exam when you're young and fresh out of school...

i know, it damn near killed my to pass the missouri bar at the age of 44...

i'm pretty sure i wouldn't pass now if i tried it again without a study course...

hey, congratulations on the job gig...

it makes the 3rd year a lot less stressful when you already have a job in hand...

i know... :D :D :D

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind. I doubt the firm I'm working for will be willing to pay for an exam that will make me more mobile, but it's worth a shot.

[jettio]

it's funny that MM thinks he's media.....ouch...I still don't know how he types with Bush's balls on his chin...

Must have voice recognition software....uhh...never mind.