I grew up reading The Washington Post

And I grew up listening to my father rant, while religiously reading the thing, that the Post was just another liberal rag, on par with the holiest of holies, The New York Times.

Well, apparently nothing lasts for ever--if it ever happened in the first place. Like most candy-colored "things that used to be so great" nostalgia--you know, when America was America for Americans, capitalism was "free" and government was "small"--that never were (not the way people that use them mean them), this never existed.



Anyway, now they've run afoul of the rightist-watching Media Matters:

"The Washington Post just hired Marc Thiessen, who now becomes the second former George W. Bush speechwriter-turned-columnist at the paper. Thiessen isn't just any right-wing shill: He's an unapologetic advocate for torture. And he isn't alone. Charles Krauthammer, Michael Scheuer, and Richard Cohen have all used the editorial pages of the Post to defend torture.

"In his book and even on the pages of the Post, Thiessen has repeatedly made dishonest and dubious statements in support of torture. For example:

1. He falsely claimed in his most recent book that, since CIA interrogation of terror suspects began after 9-11, there were no attacks by Al Qaeda on U.S. interests at home or abroad.
2. He also claimed, falsely, in a Post op-ed that Bush oversaw "2,688 days without a terrorist attack on [American] soil," ignoring the anthrax mail attacks, the El Al shooting in Los Angeles and other domestic terrorist attacks.
3. In a Post op-ed, he called President Obama's decision to release Bush administration torture memos "irresponsible" and claimed that "Americans may die as a result.""

Me and media (online reports & radio), a conversation from last night. (or: the Day the Military Died)

A little more than twelve hours ago:

It’s come home. Again. But, maybe, only truly for the first-time. Finally, here, the meta-psychical costs are being paid, at the home front—the worst shooting at a military base, ever. They, whoever—some guy—were, are soldiers. The apparent antagonist is a psychiatrist. And he’s alive. I’d like to hear what he’s got to say. I don’t like the looks of him, his name. This might be a big fucking pebble in the pond. I can only imagine, since I’ve no access, in what way the cable news channels are tweaking-out on this. This is going to be, this is big.




[Headlines:]

Muslim groups fear backlash after Fort Hood shooting

Muslim, Arab Groups Condemn Fort Hood Shooting, Brace For Backlash

“At this juncture, again, there is no concrete reporting as to whether Nidal Malik Hasan was in fact a Muslim or an Arab. All that has been reported is that he served in the Department of Psychology at the Center for the Study of Traumatic Stress at the Bethesda Naval Facility in Bethesda, Maryland. He is believed to be 39 or 40 years old.”

“…his family is shocked by Hasan's actions and that Hasan was a "good American":

Both his parents are American, I want to make sure everyone understands, he was a good American, and we are shocked.

Contrary to prior reports, Hasan has "always been Muslim" and is not a recent convert.”




[Oh, this is fucked:] Stand up to the aggressors. Shooting at Little Rock. Bombs in Times Square.

Nidal Malik Hasan. Barack Hussein Obama. [This is not good. Not good, at all. It is] “horrifying,” Obama says.

[I’m scared to turn on the radio. But I do. It’s not any better.]

A psychiatrist on his way to Iraq. A motive? Yes. Two others? High kill count, begs more shooters. Still on lock down. Someone in your own mist…. And on Wall St., today. Shortage of seasonal flu vaccine because of swine flu vaccines priority. Bernard Kerik screwed. Global warming bill held up by Republicans. Such people will go to hell, says Taliban leader. Militants in Yemen.

Same day as Saddam Hussein sentenced to death 3 years ago today.

[Looking to be a serious case of shooting one’s own foot.]

Palestinian parents. [Oh, that’s great.] Looking more and more like only one shooter. From Virginia Tech, [ha. Lee’s, his former co-worker, is beginning to get fucked.] Why didn’t he come forward before?

Born and raised American. When do we hear about the religion of murderers? …Naval oranges. [Hassidic construction tips. Catskills.] Absorption. A huge, huge problem. [Hassid-lish. He’s hawking tiles. He says, he doesn’t usually do this. Sure.] These tiles can withhold heat or cold.




[Why didn’t they let him out?]

Why didn’t he shoot up the chain of command? Why these servicemen? This is gonna be white-washed, says military psychologist, the MI screwed up.... Eventually, we’re just gonna say enough of it, and treat them all like the enemy. Muslims need to step up, or they’ll be suspect. We’re just gonna get tired of it. –I like him. He's a psychologist, but he talks real: doesn't make excuses for abhorrent behavior.

Springs Eternal

84% of Iraqis feel safe in their neighborhoods, double from a year ago.

64% of Iraqis believe in democracy for Iraq.

-BBC/ABC poll

Hopeful, no?

But how much Iraq has actually changed for the better, and if the media's perception and propagation of these results has been skewed by the simple fact that some of only positive things to come out of years of coverage. Further, reciprocally, has the high polling numbers been influenced by the whatever media coverage they have encountered there, in Iraq.

(Look, at least Iraq excels in something. Not that we're terribly far behind.)


(Bed-Stuy, Brooklyn)

Often, in NY, people can be irrationally dramatic, even paranoid about certain neighborhoods or parts of the city.

They've lived here for a long time (like myself), or even their whole lives, and still they have prejudiced (based not just race or ethnicity, but, perhaps more importantly, class), specious and simply outdated opinions about the relative safety throughout NYC. Usually, these people are speaking of places they have never been to. Then what informs these beliefs?

Perceptions of a city's criminal topography (where crime affects both criminal and non-criminal victims) can be fomented in myriad ways: personal or second-hand experience, TV, music, and, at least here maybe, the movies (this is NY after all). But in general, it's probably the news that has most affect on how the safety of place is interpreted.

News media have a defined set of aesthetics--crucially, a fixation on all things dramatic and/or criminal--and carry the weight of an authoritative voice; so that, public opinion is formed within, or bounded by, the confines of available media outlets.

This is the standard media studies outlook. If the case, it only remains to draw a line from the nightly local newscast to how a neighborhood is perceived, both within and outside its borders.

My ongoing belief that people's words belie the morons they are, without much help from others.

Tucker Carlson about the Stewart/Cramer skirmish:

And by the way, where was Jon Stewart when the bubble was swelling? How many shows did he do on the coming financial collapse? Why didn't he warn us?

Stewart's answer invariably is: I'm a comedian. That's not my job. But that's a dodge, and increasingly unsustainable. In fact, Stewart is a player in the national conversation. He seeks to influence politics and policy, and he succeeds. It's time for him to admit that, and be held to the same standards everyone else at his level (including Jim Cramer) lives by.

Wasn't the whole point Stewart was making was all these folks weren't doing their job, i.e., not up to the "standards everyone...(including Jim Cramer) lives by."

Media Matters take on the situation:

In the Seinfeld episode "The Comeback," George Costanza is embarrassed by his inability to think of a response to a co-worker who made fun of his overconsumption of shrimp cocktail by saying, "Hey George, the ocean called. They're running out of shrimp." George later thinks up what he believes is the ideal comeback, "Well, the Jerk Store called, and they're running out of you," and becomes obsessed with gaining an opportunity to use the line, eventually flying to Ohio in order to do so.

George's long-planned zinger falls flat, however, when the co-worker responds, "What's the difference? You're their all-time best seller." Flustered, and again unable to think of a witty response, George blurts out: "Oh yeah? Well I had sex with your wife!" -- a jibe that blows up in his face when he is told the man's wife is in a coma. The episode ends with George driving home, plotting yet another attempt to win the verbal battle.

Conservative commentator Tucker Carlson has been doing his best George Costanza impersonation for the past week, as he lashes out again and again at Jon Stewart, who humiliated Carlson on national television more than four years ago.

More from the "bogus 'war on the wealthy' storyline."

Excuse the excessive borrowing, but this budget is too important... If you care about reality and stuff. Again, from Media Matters:

The media's tax fraud

by Jamison Foser

Last week, President Obama unveiled a budget outline that extends the Bush tax cuts for all but the top two percent of taxpayers and makes permanent a tax credit of up to $800 for low- and middle-income workers that was included in the recent stimulus package, among other tax cuts.

On the other hand, individual taxpayers with taxable income above $200,000 ($250,000 for families) per year would pay more in taxes under Obama's plan, under which the tax rates paid on income in the top brackets would revert to their levels under President Clinton in the 1990s -- from 33 and 35 percent to 36 and 39.6 percent. Slate.com's Daniel Gross estimates that for someone with $350,000 in income, this will amount to about $1,500 a year in increased taxes...

If the expiration, on schedule, of tax cuts that were always scheduled to expire is described as a policy of raising taxes, that makes a mockery of the entire tax policy debate of the past decade. It rigs tax debates in favor of Republicans, who find it easier to argue for tax cuts for the wealthy if they can argue that the cuts won't cost very much -- by making them "temporary" -- but who then get to argue that the scheduled expiration that they included in order to make the cuts look affordable would constitute a tax increase. The GOP gets to have it both ways, describing tax cuts as temporary when it helps them, and pretending they were intended to be permanent when it helps them. It's no great surprise Republicans want to have it both ways -- but that doesn't mean the media should go along.

The actual change the Obama proposal makes to the Bush tax rates is making permanent the cuts for those who make less than $200,000. The proposal doesn't actually increase income tax rates for anyone compared to current law, and it reduces them for the vast majority of taxpayers. Yet the "increase" -- mandated by a law signed by President Bush, and scheduled to occur for nearly a decade -- has gotten all the attention, while the cuts have largely escaped notice from the major media...

You have to wonder how media stars like Blitzer and Gibson have lost touch with their viewers so badly that they think $200,000 incomes are typical.

Charlie Gibson reportedly makes $8 million a year and is paid less than his counterparts at CBS and NBC.

Might that have something to do with his lack of perspective? How could it not?

How could it not, indeed.

Journalists are doing what they can do.

With a shrug and a smirk, the woman from the LA Times response to criticism of the business media on News Hour, PBS. Great defense. Though some don't think that's enough.

Thanks, in large part to Jon Stewart, the world today (finally?) has been talking about what role the business media play in the economy and to what extent are they culpable for the mess we're in.

The breathtaking interview (more like debate... really a bitch slap) last night with Jim Cramer and Jon Stewart on the Daily Show was one of the peak moments so far in the aftermath of this money-mire. You have to give Cramer credit for diving head long into the home turf of a pissed-off Jon Stewart.

Of course, Jimmy was no match for Jon. But what got me was the attitude of disgust with which Stewart seemed possessed: he wasn't just showing Cramer as a fool, all too easy for the master, but chided him like a child who refuses to take serious his irresponsibility and lacks the gravitas of the situation.

"It's not a fucking game!"

"They burned the fucking house down, then walked away rich."

"This song ain't about you."

I haven't seen Stewart like this since after 9-11, when he broke out of his normal role (a good one to start) and helped to make TV something more than entertainment or advertising or even education. He was directly linked to us, the audience--at least here, in NY. He was living in the same world, with the same things going on around him. He didn't laugh because we weren't. He got choked up because we did, too. He was confused and scared and pissed--kind of like he was last night--and so we're we.