A Clarion Call To The Media From Editor& Publisher

[cali]

Greg Mitchell, the editor of E & P, has penned an excellent piece about the media's responsibilites in what he calls "A Crisis Almost Without Equal".

"No matter which party they generally favor or political stripes they wear, newspapers and other media outlets need to confront the fact that America faces a crisis almost without equal in recent decades.

Our president, in a time of war, terrorism and nuclear intrigue, will likely remain in office for another 33 months, with crushingly low approval ratings that are still inching lower. Facing a similar problem, voters had a chance to quickly toss Jimmy Carter out of office, and did so. With a similar lengthy period left on his White House lease, Richard Nixon quit, facing impeachment. Neither outcome is at hand this time.

<snip>

Democrats, meanwhile, cross their fingers that Bush doesn’t do something really stupid -- i.e. prematurely nuke Iran -- while they try to win control of at least one house in Congress by doing nothing yet somehow earning (they hope) the anti-Bush vote.

Meanwhile, a severely weakened president retains, and has shown he is willing to use, all of his commander-in-chief authority, and then some.

<snip>

So let’s assume, as Nixon might put it, that we do have George Bush to kick around for another almost-three-years. How worried should we be about the possible damage he might inflict -- and what can the press do about it?

<snip>

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/columns/pressingissues_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002383107

[SpiralHawk]

1. Bravo E & P. Kicked and recommended

DUers might want to e-mail this article to their local media outlets, reporters, whatever. Do a bit of work to be sure it gets widely read by media folk.


E & P has been doing excellent work the last several years.

For example, they gave excellent coverage to the male prostitute in the Bush White House scandal (Jeff Gannon/James Guckert).*


*(a prostitution scandal that I feel will come back to haunt the Bush-Republicon White House some day).

[cali]

2. Agreed.

They've been way ahead on several issues. It's well worth reading.

[corkhead]

3. WOW! too bad it isn't a front page op-ed in the NYT where it belongs

[eek]

4. k,r

thanks!

[cali]

5. shameless kick

for my own thread, or rather for Mitchell's brave editorial. Read it!

[gratuitous]

6. Thanks Mr. Mitchell, really, but . . .

I can't help but imagine the cavernous collective yawn this is going to elicit from the lapdogs of the somnambulent media. What can the press do about anything the Bush administration does? Well, they can do quite a lot, but what will they do? Damned little if the past is any kind of prologue.

Yes, some segments of the national media have temporarily roused from their torpor to opine that, for example, burning CIA covert operatives isn't a good thing. Or that if the administration is going to launch an invasion that being honest with the American public, which is going to supply the bodies for said invasion, might be the least we can expect. But otherwise? Ehhhh, not so much.

If you told them this could affect their cocktail party invitations, you'd probably be able to light a fire under their collective ass. But short of that, if it doesn't affect their swell social life with all the right people in DC, what do they care?

[grasswire]

7. too true

The desire to be part of Washington society has always been the downfall of those sent there to report on it. The lure of the Cosmos Club, the parties, the Alfalfa Club -- all of it is heady stuff. Olde Washington Society believes that while administrations come and go, this clique will always endure and prevail. Many journos strive to become part of the clique. To do so, they must relinquish any burning desire they might have had to commit journalism.

[yodermon]

8. WTF??

Democrats, meanwhile, cross their fingers that Bush doesn’t do something really stupid -- i.e. nuke Iran -- while they try to win control of at least one house in Congress by doing nothing yet somehow earning (they hope) the anti-Bush vote.

Are Democrats doing nothing? Or does media just report that they're doing nothing, no matter what Democrats actually do?

This article purports to call out the media but fails to acknolwedge (and in fact contributes) to this catch-22 Dems face.