Media swipes at DU - attempts to drive high profile dems away?

[DireStrike]

I can't think of any other reason they would be doing this. Do they really expect they can damage our "credibility" with press releases? It's not like we're even an information source - we're a discussion site. There is no official consensus here. We do not put out information. There is no credibility to damage.

I can't believe they would be that stupid, falling into the old "every problem is a nail" trap. Maybe they are. I think it's more likely it's an attempt to discredit any prominent dems that may venture here or reveal themselves, like E.E. or the Dem strategist.

Or maybe they're just being lazy. The "blogosphere" is the hot thing of the day, and there's nothing the media likes to talk about more than the media.

In any case, all publicity is good publicity.

[Postmanx]

1. Do you really believe "High Profile" dems

Hang out at DU?

[Cobalt Violet]

2. Yes. n/t

[Ripley]

3. Chris Heinz and Elizabeth Edwards used to.

Dean's people and Kerry's people used to. Now? Who knows.

[Taxloss]

13. Really? Elizabeth Edwards?

Wow. Openly?

[Ripley]

15. Yes, after she was diagnosed with cancer.

People here posted get well notes and she responded.

[Taxloss]

19. That was nice of her. She always struck me as a nice lady.

eom

[Midlodemocrat]

4. Remember, it was just Fox

I don't think too many high profile dems watch Faux. JMO.

[DireStrike]

5. Fox and the NYT.

It's the echo chamber. Start yelling and somebody else will yell.

[Midlodemocrat]

16. True, I had forgotten about the NYT.

They can yell all they want. We aren't going anywhere.

[Az]

6. Easy target

Do you really think they are going to put effort into anything when they can take some easy potshots at a group that in appearance most will be skittish of? There are some wild theories running around in DU these days. Conspiracy nuts are a favored human interest story. And it serves a double purpose of making a known dem/liberal group seem loopy.

[Ripley]

8. Honestly, I don't get the fascination here with what Faux says.

If you want to talk loopy conspiracy sites...let's start with Freepville which are devout Faux watchers I'm sure. Go from there...

[DireStrike]

9. Yes, but it seems like they didn't think about this one at all.

We're not an info source - never have to be cited - nobody who comes here has to say they do elsewhere.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

7. I think their story/attack on the site is significant. It shows that Rove

and company feel that DU is significant. Doubters laugh if you want. There's no way they'd devote screen time to trying to discredit DU if they didn't see that it had some power to oppose their agenda.

[DireStrike]

10. My feelings exactly, they are trying to hurt us (and laughably failing.)

[vitointn]

21. Rove

Now there is one dirty back-stabbing troglodyte who couldn't get any candidate to win an election solely on the issues.

I have a pic of him trying to peek down the blouse of a woman he was posing with...how do I go about posting it?

[DireStrike]

25. If it's on a website, just paste the URL

If not, you need to find someplace to upload it... try http://www.imageshack.us/

[newyawker99]

32. Hi vitointn!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Just Me]

30. No doubts here *smile*. DU is threatening.

Hence, RW seeks to discredit/diminish/destroy.

I embrace their actions as a compliment!!!

[Bronco69]

11. "The "blogosphere" is the hot thing of the day"

You're absolutely right! When people log onto DU and find out that we don't carry water for the bush* team it might damage the media's message that everybody loves bush*. I also agree that there's no such thing as bad publicity. Here's a quote the corporate media might be familiar with..."Bring Em On!"

[patricia_k]

12. For my part ...

... I cannot quite distinguish this place from the NYT readers opinion forums in terms of format.

Can someone tell me why this site has been described in the recent NYT piece as a "blogspot" and not a message board?

And why (grinning) the site's spell checker does not recognize the term "blogspot".

[newyawker99]

33. Hi patricia_k!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Downtown Hound]

14. They're being lazy

they're being Bush whores, and they're just being stupid, as is typical of the corporate media. Notice how they take swipes at us but never quote the truly vile, hate-filled crap that comes off of FR? There's a double standard in the media in how they treat liberals and conservatives. But I wouldn't worry about it, like you said, no publicity is bad publicity. This is something the right learned long ago, and why people like Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin say some of the stupidest things you could imagine. It gets attention. If people come to DU after hearing about it in the media, they're going to quickly realize that it's an open forum with many intelligent opinions, and they might sign up. Not bad for us.

[patricia_k]

18. I've ...

... just signed up on the basis of the NYT piece and a short snoop around here.

G'day, all.

[Downtown Hound]

24. Welcome patricia!

And thank you NY Times!

[DireStrike]

26. Welcome!

Enjoy your stay! =)

[patricia_k]

31. Thank you ...

... for the kind welcomes. :-)

I shall probably lurk more than I post for a while. You folks are fast!

[txaslftist]

27. Welcome!!

Spend some time here and you'll get to like -some- of us.:grouphug:

[Mike Niendorff]

17. "First they ignore you ...

then they mock you
then they fight you
then you win."

-- Ghandi


MDN

[Wiley50]

29. I second this emotion! n/t

[Bouncy Ball]

20. Nah

I mean any high profile Dem could be here without anyone knowing it, anyway! So how would it drive them away? They wouldn't even need to post, just lurk.

They're just being shitty "journalists" as usual.

And you are right about the publicity. Everyone's been saying "oh no here come the trolls" but I FOUND DU through a shitty little right wing blog that was bitching about this place and I thought "Hey I gotta see that!" and I've been here ever since!

[Maiden England]

22. old addage - there is no such thing as bad publicity

You'd think they'd have learnt after the Franken fiasco. But apparently faux really is run by a bunch of brainless bimbos.....

No surprise there then.

[KurtNYC]

23. Their circulation is down

Blogging is up. They are chasing their ex-readers. They aren't interactive. We are. They have damaged their own credibility horribly over the last 4 years so perhaps they are trying to level the field.

So someone asked if earthquakes could be triggered by nuclear testing/explosions. So what?! It is a question that comes up so often it is one the FAQ's at Berkeley's Seismological center:

http://www.seismo.berkeley.edu/seismo/faq/nuke_2.html

People who understand how blogging and discussion boards work will see these attacks for what they are -- unbalanced and out of context. We saw Crossfire compare itself desparately to TDS, now the NYT wants to compare itself to us. :-)

However, one poster on an open bulletin board system asking about earthquakes HARDLY compares to this:
The Associated Press quotes the New York Times management as admitting that the Jayson Blair four years of lying as a Times reporter is "a low point in the 152 year history of the newspaper."

more: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=32750

[txaslftist]

28. Found DU through a right wing blog...

Some one said something nasty about DU during the campaign, I googled it, lurked for a while, and am now posting.

You guys give me a lot of inspiration and hope for the party of the people.