NYTimes elevates & fawns over handpicked bloggers (DailyKos, Wonkette etc)

[dumpster_baby]

The Times and corporate media in general just love to handpick and elevate to fame certain "mainstream" bloggers. These bloggers are purportedly liberal. I doubt it. Democrats, to be sure. But the Times would never elevate these bloggers if they were anything but centrists who are concentrated mainly on the horserace aspect of this campaign, and who limit their political analysis to horserace stuff and posting photoshopped Bush pics.

Of course the Times would never stoop to a 9 page story on Slashdot or DU, or Usenet. Their readers might actually be exposed to radical opinions....

I am sure these bloggers Josh Marshall (or whatever), wonkette, atrios, whatever, are good writers, well informed, etc. But there is NO WAY they (or the mainstream media, for that matter) can compete with forums like DU, slashdot, metafilter, plastic, fark, et al. On each of those forums, there are dozens or even a hundred or more posters who are just as good, just as informed, etc. How can one blogger compete with that? No way!

Anyway, this NY Times story is a long detailing of some of the handpicked "liberal" bloggers and how they covered the GOP convention:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/26/magazine/26BLOGS.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5090&en=8b59680f1bd93479&ex=1253851200&partner=rssuserland

[Eric J in MN]

1. How much coverage has "Air America" given to Democratic Underground?

Isn't it a bit much to expect "The NY Times" to talk about us when we aren't mentioned on "The Al Franken Show" or "The Majority Report" (at least not during the many hours I've tuned in.)

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

5. Mike Malloy is the only AAR host I've heard mention DU

At the beginning, Majority Report had DU listed on its blog among its "sites important to us." Then they removed the link. I've asked many times that they restore it but no response.

A few weeks ago Sam Seder was pushing the Bush medal story that Walt Starr had researched. Attribution to DU? Absolutely none.

[Ivan Sputnik]

11. I heard Randi Rhodes mention it once.

She said "I love DU." Her callers have mentioned it at times. I think I have heard it mentioned in passing on Majority Report, too. But nobody at AAR seems to make a point of promoting it. Maybe they think there are a few too many tin-foil hats here?

[Poiuyt]

15. Guy James mentions us a lot

[Eric J in MN]

20. I don't think "Majority Report" ever linked to here. I've

frequented their website from the beginning.

[Eric J in MN]

2. Also, how often do "Daily Kos" or wonkette publish photo-shopped

pictures?

I don't recall seeing photo-shops of Bush on either website.

[dumpster_baby]

4. As ALWAYS, the established media will elevate elitist institutions

Being elitist seems almost to be a major goal of the corporate media.
I mean, I have on occassion read each of the blogs mentioned in this Times story. I even have them bookmarked. But I hardly ever visit them. I found them to be wanting compared to forums like DU, Slashdot, Fark, kuro5hin.org and metafilter. They just CANNOT COMPETE!

How can one or even half a dozen bloggers compete with all the educated, well-informed people on these forums.

Pardon me, but bloggers like those mentioned by the times in this story SUCK in comparison to these forums. I mean, in ONE HOUR on DU, there is more interesting stuff on DU than on all week for all 3 (or was it 4) or the blogs that were the focus of this Times story.

Upon reading that story, how can any liberal deny the thesis put forth by people like Chomsky, Zinn, Herman, and many other leftists, et al, that the mainstream media has as one of its major goals, the restriction of ideas being fed to the public?

[featherman]

3. Both are good and in my favorites as a daily "check in"

get over it

[LoZoccolo]

6. It's probably about signal-to-noise ratio.

Funny you mention Slashdot, because you go there and find that most of the posts have been moderated down such that you have to drill into them to see them.

DU? I've seen good things, I've seen bad things, and I've seen a lot of useless things.

Usenet? There's a lot of spam on Usenet. And pr0n. Which is cool if you're looking for it.

[KoKo]

7. Here's a good snip for those of you who refuse to register for NYT's:

(It's a great mult-page article, and shows that the political tide in readership tastes in the US is shifting. I love that the "mainstream press" is losing out to the blogs and that there's a shift from the RW Blogs getting all the attention)



In a recent national survey, the Pew Internet and American Life Project found that more than two million Americans have their own blog. Most of them, nobody reads. The blogs that succeed, like Kaus's, are written in a strong, distinctive, original voice. In January, a serious-minded former editor at The Chronicle of Higher Education named Ana Marie Cox reinvented herself online as the Wonkette, a foulmouthed, hard-drinking, sex-obsessed politics junkie. Joshua Micah Marshall, in his columns for The Hill and articles for The Washington Monthly, writes like every other overeducated journalist. But on his blog, Talking Points Memo, he has become an irate spitter of well-crafted vitriol aimed at the president, whom he compared, one day, to Tony Soprano torching his friend's sporting-goods store for the sake of a little extra cash. When Marshall's in a bad mood, he portrays mainstream journalists as a bunch of ''corrupt,'' ''idiotic'' hacks, mired in ''cosmopolitan and baby-boomer self-loathing,'' whose bad habits have become ''ingrained and chronic, like a battered dog who cowers and shakes when the abuser gives a passing look.'' Moulitsas's site, Daily Kos, teems with information -- sophisticated analysis of poll numbers, crystal-ball babble, links to Senate, House and governor ''outlook charts.'' But what pulls you in is not the data; it's his voice. He's cruel and superior, and he knows his side is going to win.


But just as Fox News has been creaming CNN, the traffic on Kaus's and Sullivan's sites has flat-lined recently, while Atrios's and Moulitsas's are booming. Left-wing politics are thriving on blogs the way Rush Limbaugh has dominated talk radio, and in the last six months, the angrier, nastier partisan blogs have been growing the fastest. Daily Kos has tripled in traffic since June. Josh Marshall's site has quadrupled in the last year. It's almost as though, in a time of great national discord, you don't want to know both sides of an issue. The once-soothing voice of the nonideological press has become, to many readers, a secondary concern, a luxury, even something suspect. It's hard to listen to a calm and rational debate when the building is burning and your pants are smoking.

But at the same time that blogs have moved away from the political center, they have become increasingly influential in the campaigns -- James P. Rubin, John Kerry's foreign-policy adviser, told me, ''They're the first thing I read when I get up in the morning and the last thing I read at night.'' Among the Washington press corps, too, their impact is obvious. Back in 2002, Marshall helped stoke the fires licking at Trent Lott's feet, digging up old interviews that suggested his support for Strom Thurmond's racial policies went way back; Marshall's scoops found their way onto The Associated Press wire and the Op-Ed page of The New York Times. Earlier this month, a platoon of right-wing bloggers launched a coordinated assault against CBS News and its memos claiming that President Bush got special treatment in the National Guard; within 24 hours, the bloggers' obsessive study of typefaces in the 1970's migrated onto Drudge, then onto Fox News and then onto the networks and the front pages of the country's leading newspapers.

During the 1972 presidential campaign, Timothy Crouse covered the campaign-trail press corps in Rolling Stone magazine, reporting that he later expanded into his revealing and funny book ''The Boys on the Bus.'' Crouse described the way a few top journalists like R.W. Apple Jr., David S. Broder, Jack Germond and Jules Witcover, through their diligence, ambition and supreme self-confidence, set the agenda for the whole political race. This summer, sitting in the Tank and reading campaign blogs, you could sometimes get a half-giddy, half-sickening feeling that something was shifting, that the news agenda was beginning to be set by this largely unpaid, T-shirt-clad army of bloggers.

[Eloriel]

16. What unbelievable tripe!

and in the last six months, the angrier, nastier partisan blogs have been growing the fastest. Daily Kos has tripled in traffic since June. Josh Marshall's site has quadrupled in the last year. It's almost as though, in a time of great national discord, you don't want to know both sides of an issue. The once-soothing voice of the nonideological press has become, to many readers, a secondary concern, a luxury, even something suspect. It's hard to listen to a calm and rational debate when the building is burning and your pants are smoking.



How DARE they imagine, let alone WRITE, that the mainstream press in any remote way presents "both sides of an issue" or is "nonideological."

These people -- people in the mainstream press -- are DELUSIONAL, pure and simple.

Edited to add: blogs wouldn't be very popular at ALL if the mianstream press were doing its job in presenting the real facts (all of them) along with cogent, insightful, accurate analysis.

[dumpster_baby]

17. yep. Eyes were rolling all over the world when people read that line

at least that is what happened in Europe, Canada and on the east and west coast....

[KoKo]

18. I know...I guess the writer was afraid to call them "partisan whores sell

outs! Because the NYT's wasn't likely to print it." :evilgrin:

I did like the article in many ways,though, because it did point out the possibility of the Liberal Bloggers getting corrupted the same way the "manstream"(ha!) press has through the years.

"Wonkett" being a good example with her MTV gig. Once you start taking money from the MTV folks you are on your way.

[Eric J in MN]

21. I think MTV would have just meant more exposure. I'm sorry

that didn't work out for her.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

27. or "even something suspect"

I believe that covers the possibility it is not without bias.
It was nice enough that they did this article. Some people will just never be happy.

[Nlighten1]

8. Those bloggers are great.

Before you impune them I suggest you read them.

[merh]

9. That they even report on bloggers is a step in the right direction,

imho. The bloggers they mention often refer to and or give credit to the research of DU posters. Why is it that some here cannot find the positive.

I am elated that they are beginning to give bloggers some coverage. I knew that would happen after the "memo" controversy and the credit given to bloggers for "breaking the story".

[dumpster_baby]

12. you have a good point

I guess I am cynical....and it is a step in the right direction.

[merh]

14. What I find humorous is that Rove's tactics in "debunking" the

memos and his use of bloggers as the group that "broke" the story and began the controversy can now be used to our advantage. Once, bloggers were just considered internet kooks or nerds, now the press may start paying attention to them, thanks to the credibility given to them for their role in the memo reports.

Poetic justice or sheer irony, Rove may have opened a portal he cannot now close and we need to take advantage of his tactics.

[DeepModem Mom]

19. You're right, merh -- I get disheartened posting articles...

that are not perfect, but "steps in the right direction," and, IMO, deserving of attention and even praise -- only to see them slammed for coming from the New York Times, or even the LA Times. Compared to the TV media, where most of America gets any news it gets, our print press is often something we can still be thankful for. As proof, just look any day at LBN, where there will be, along with some revolting pieces from political reporters, what will likely be the only "mainstream" coverage of the endless stream of Bush scandals and outrages.

Also, because we are limited to only four paragraphs, and most DUers, I think, including myself very often, don't read the entire article, a wrong impression can be gotten from an excerpt.

I thought this NYT Mag piece was very positive, acknowledging the growing power of bloggers who are our friends and advocates, and, by inference, the growing influence of all our fellow bloggers.

[Eric J in MN]

22. Good point. "Daily Kos" links to "Democratic Underground." nt

nt

[sadiesworld]

10. Free trade and outsourcing.

The elites will talk about ANYTHING in order to avoid these issues.

Some of the best, well-known "lefties" are free traders (Krugman).

Who even brings up this subject?
Moyers-tucked in a corner of an increasingly right-leaning PBS.
Dobbs-"outsourcing is terrible, but what can be done?"
Buchanan-it isn't very appealing agreeing with a racist.

That's my list.

Where are the nationally syndicated columnists who support withdrawing from the WTO? Why no face time on cable for union reps? Have you EVER heard/seen a discussion in the mainstream news about globalization's effect on the environment?

No real surprise that a corporate media will only acknowledge corporate-friendly bloggers.

[Eric J in MN]

23. What blog should he have mentioned? nt

nt

[DulceDecorum]

13. Blogs for Bush

How did Blogs For Bush get started?
A. The idea for Blogs For Bush came about in August 2003. After seeing various Bush/Cheney '04 themed blogs, Blogs For Bush owner, Matt, thought it would be a good idea to create a site to help organize all pro-Bush sites and make them accessible in one place on the internet. Building on that idea, it was decided Blogs For Bush would help visitors who wanted to help the campaign get the tools and information they needed.
http://www.blogsforbush.com/faq.html

Blogs for Bush in the Media
http://www.blogsforbush.com/media.html

I know of at least one longstanding DU member
who regularly posts on Blogs for Bush.
Needless to say, we do NOT get along.

[dumpster_baby]

24. Steve Gilliard (of netslaves) apparently did'nt think much of this article

He slams it here:
http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2004/09/when-bloggers-ruled-internet.html

[dumpster_baby]

25. Just as I expected wonkette's nothing but political gossip, content-free

I looked through wonkette.com, and it is just what I expected from something that the NYTIMES would give a lot of attention to--nothing but political gossip, presidential campaign horseracing, and a lot of incestuous blog links, and most sickening of all, right up top, a bunch of quotes from other people talking about her!.

Really disgusting.

Just to see how indepth her political reporting really is, I searched wonkette.com for various keywords which I feel would reflect how much indepth political discussion is done on her blog. here are the results:
first I serached for some 'horserace', political gossip terms:

kerry--six pages of hits

rove-- 6 pages of hits.

Then I searched for political terms that should tell us whether she is really a person who discusses politics as opposed to gossip:

taxation--ZERO hits (now we start to see how "wonky" "wonkette" really is--maybe we ought to call her "gossipette").

neoliberal -- ZERO!

healthcare -- 2 hits

leftism--ZERO!

leftist --ZERO!

Chomsky--ZERO!

Well, now we know what sort of blogs the NYTIMES in interested in promoting to the public.

[Philostopher]

28. To be fair to wonkette ...

I've never seen her claim to be a liberal blogger. She's essentially a stand-up comic who doesn't get up on a stage, and Bush* is a big, fat target right now, as a subject for performance art vanity mongers like her.

I wasn't impressed with her insight. She's occasionally funny, but then, so am I. She makes fun of everybody, not just Bush*. She's just a smart-ass who makes the nut by being snide toward politicos. So's Bill Maher, and I don't like him that much most of the time, either.

[Eric J in MN]

29. wonkette is supposed to be gossip. She never claimed to be profound (nt)

nt

[dumpster_baby]

26. DU also has FAR more hits than wonkette.com

Wonkette is rated #17000 website in terms of traffic, and DU is about #6000. Yet DU is not even mentioned in this article about politics on the Web. Gee, maybe it is because there are Scary Leftists discussing Real Politics here from time to time?

Here is the traffic comparison from Alexa:

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?&range=6m&size=medium&url=wonkette.com#top

[Zero Division]

30. Atrios, Marshall, and Kos are excellent. How are they "not liberal"?

We need more voices like theirs out in the mainstream, not less. They're far better than most of the Cable TV pundits or people who are picked to speak for the "liberal" point of view on TV.

I have no problem with those three being singled out as representative of liberal blogs.

Wonkette, on the other hand, while certainly liberal, dwells mostly on snarky gossip that often relates to politics. Her blog is only really good for the occasional superficial laugh.