Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Greenwald: Newsweek's Holly Bailey with a moment of unintended candor

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 10:58 AM
Original message
Greenwald: Newsweek's Holly Bailey with a moment of unintended candor
Bravo for Glenn for holding most of these 'journalists' in such contempt. So many deserve it.


http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/26/anonymity/

Newsweek's Holly Bailey with a moment of unintended candor


It's important to praise the members of the establishment media who candidly acknowledge that journalism as they practice it has no real standards. They are much more honest than the ones who continue to maintain the pompous pretense that establishment "journalism" is some sort of elevated and noble profession governed by a complex set of ethical rules for ensuring accuracy and transparency.

In a frivolous little fluff piece about Barack Obama's struggles to adjust to the loss of privacy and personal freedom as President, Newsweek's Holly Bailey this week quotes multiple anonymous sources -- "a close Obama friend"; "an aide"; "an aide"; "one senior Obama aide" -- to do nothing other than explain what a down-to-earth guy Barack is and how he longs for the days when he could take early evening strolls with his kids. Bailey -- Newsweek's White House correspondent who famously swung on John McCain's tree tire while swilling Chardonnay at the McCains' weekend party for their reporter-fans -- deserves credit, in some perverse sort of way, because she can't even bring herself to pretend any longer that there are any standards that govern when anonymity will be granted:

After {Obama} said goodbye to his last guest, Chinese President Hu Jintao, Obama walked to the back door and peered out. "Come on," he called to two of his closest aides, senior adviser David Axelrod and Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. "Let's go take a walk."

The Secret Service agents on duty "freaked," in the words of one senior Obama aide who recounted the story (and who, like others quoted in this story, asked for anonymity for the usual reasons).


Like The Washington Post -- which, in the wake of controversies over Iraq reporting, self-glorifyingly trumpeted its new Serious, highly restrictive anonymity policy yet now shamelessly publishes glorifying profiles of a key torture advocate based on nothing but the justifying claims of his anonymous "friends" -- Newsweek previously vowed to use anonymity far more sparingly in the wake of its own reporting scandal. Yet here is one of its star "political reporters" casually and indiscriminately granting anonymity to every politically connected person who requests it, and she just brazenly acknowledges that she has no justification for that other than what she dismissively refers to as "the usual reasons." The fact that this article is frivolous and gossipy makes the reckless grant of anonymity far worse, not better, as it illustrates how indiscriminately they now use it.

These are just gossip rag techniques. Disseminating personality chatter from unnamed "friends" is a staple of National Enquirer and People . . . as well as the "political reporting" of The Washington Post, Newsweek, and Politico. At least the former don't pretend to be anything other than what they are.

* * * * *
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
OHdem10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
1. When the decision was made that News Is Entertainment and indeed
that decision was made, the idea of standards was sent blowing in the
wind.

The reason Fox has been successful is Roger Ailes understood and
embraced the truth of where Journalism is. Entertainment.

The others, for the most part, have been trying to straddle
an imaginary line. They have ended up neither fish nor fowl.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. This blogger thinks there's a more nefarious reason for
faux doing what they do besides entertainment... This blog is around to shred faux whenever possible, so he may be biased, but he makes some good points.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5532987

Fox News Confidential: The Truth Behind Its Secret Mission

snip//

The real mission of Fox News is {cue trumpets} to so thoroughly tarnish the practice of journalism that majorities of the public would recoil in disgust at all of it. Murdoch and Ailes knew that the introduction of a single cable network would have a difficult time enshrouding the whole of the mediasphere in their veil of lies. So rather than try to change peoples minds, they would endeavor to poison the relationship that people have with the press.

Consider this: If it were really the primary goal of Fox News to have an influence on political discourse, they could have launched the channel with a proudly partisan theme that celebrated their conservative outlook. They could have honestly put their views on the table and fought it out in the public square. That is how a sincere enterprise with faith in their convictions would behave. Instead, they chose to dress themselves up as fair and balanced, an objective they never intended to pursue. Then, while swimming in a swamp of their own bias, they aggressively attack their competitors as biased. At some point the community of news consumers will throw up their hands and surrender, convinced that the baby is just as contaminated as the bathwater. And that is precisely what Fox intends.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tandalayo_Scheisskopf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 11:22 AM
Response to Original message
2. Dear Ghod in Hebben!!!
What IS this world coming to when The POTUS takes a walk in the garden??!! See! See! See how far this once-great nation has fallen, for we have a President who takes walks in the garden!!! Pray people, get on your knees and PRAY before your god, trembling in fear of His awesome awesomeness, that this country is delivered from the scourge that is Obama, the president who walks in the garden and eats the brains of live babies.

Do I really need the "sarcasm" tag here?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Sep 19th 2020, 11:40 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC