Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
I bet the Times et al crew are just pissed. They seem to be losing their monopoly.
|
Probably, though I think you misunderstand the real agenda of the mainstream media. It's the same as the alternative media that has risen to the fore --- to cover things that get attention and please the readers. Not all of this is positive, however.
The poster boy for this shift, Drudge, has fundamentally altered the nature of what constitutes a news story to the point that reporting on what the agenda-setters are saying is itself sufficient to justify coverage. Example: the Kerry intern scandal that went nowhere despite Drudge flogging it. If a mainstream politician had done what Drudge did there, or had directed it at Bush, you would have called him a character assassin and discounted all of his further statements as lies or worse. Instead, anything over a .500 batting average on accuracy, and the right thinks Drudge is a hero for printing things the NYT won't. Query whether new media like Drudge are using the "publisher" immunity in the CDA to print things that journalism has said for the past 500 years shouldn't be immunized.
As a person who thinks journalistic ethics should have at least the same force and effect as the ethics governing attorneys --- which of course don't include impartiality, but do involve fair play and responsibility for consequences --- I'm worried these alternative media sources don't seem to have developed a replacement scheme.
