Candy Crowley, Girl Stenographer
Once there was a fine political website called the Gadflyer (which no longer exists). One day in 2004, one of its writers said the following:
Journalism’s adherence to the ideal of objectivity and its reliance on “two-sided” reporting make it structurally weak in the face of official mendacity. Reporters are taught that they are supposed to achieve balance at all costs and have difficulty when the scales are tipped in one direction, much less when one side is lying outright.
After watching the media’s performance during the Bush years—or during the last two weeks of the 2008 presidential campaign—it’s hard to imagine that there’s anybody left who wouldn’t understand this. Monday night, CNN’s Candy Crowley confirmed the truth of it. As she understands her job, it’s to uncritically report whatever she hears and let the voters sort it out.
So . . . the voters are supposed to choose a candidate based on the information they get from CNN, but they will have to find context for the information elsewhere to help them weigh and measure the value of it, because CNN is merely a conduit. Thanks for clearing that up.
One pauses here to quietly give thanks that Crowley wasn’t covering Germany in the 1930s.
Somewhere in the bardo, Edward R. Murrow lights another cigarette, ponders how the country might have been different if he had been the same sort of “journalist,” and begins quietly banging his head against his desk.
Posted: September 17th, 2008 under Aargh, Bushco, Media.
Comments: 5
Comments
Comment from Josh Hammond
Time: September 17, 2008, 6:26 am
“Mendacity”, one of my favorite words, thanks to Tennessee Williams in The Cat On The Hot Tin Roof”. There is a odor at CNN. Context is pretty much a thing of the past, and candidates are among the worst offenders. For example, why can’t Obama link McCain to Hoover, they both say/said the same thing about the economy? Why can’t Obama link his kind of economic policies to those of Bill Clinton, a recent context everyone can relate to?
By the way, what is “bardo”? That’s a new one for me and I can’t find it in my dictionary.
Comment from jabartlett
Time: September 17, 2008, 8:37 am
As I understand it, the bardo is from the Tibetan Book of the Dead, where souls wait to be reincarnated, or something. It just bubbled up when I wrote this post at 6:30 this morning, so I could be wrong.
Comment from Leftcoast
Time: September 17, 2008, 9:02 am
“Balance” to these folks is countering a proven indisputable fact with the opinion of anyone, with or without standing or expertise, who says otherwise and give it equal validity and weighting. It’s as pernicious a practice as one can imagine.
Comment from Josh Hammond
Time: September 17, 2008, 9:14 am
LC, submit that definition to Webster.
Comment from Sasha
Time: September 17, 2008, 9:26 am
This morning Ruth Marcus (never one for balanced reporting) admits that “fair” doesn’t mean both sides are treated as if they are the same. Will wonders never cease. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/16/AR2008091602874.html
Write a comment