Ah, this is the life. To be on vacation near the ocean, sunning on the beach by day, and, by night, hearing Hardball’s Chris Matthews, of all people, repeatedly liken Bush to Ted Baxter, the obtuse anchorman on the old Mary Tyler Moore Show. As I eat fried calamari and striped bass, I get to see Matthews, hardly a friend… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (9)Page 1 of 1 pagesHaving just relocated into the South East Missouri from Central Illinois I must say your articles are a bit of fresh air ... given the fact that this area new to me, is “Rush Country”.
The hypocrisy with which our mainstream journalists present their works is making me more ill with each word I read, and every moment I watch.
It is SO frustrating to see otherwise intelligent people blindly follow the hype that is spun by the journalist puppets who by design (of corporate media) have become wage-slaves not questioning their editors and directives. These individuals are NOT true reporters, rather drones following orders, writing and speaking as directed.
If in fact our soldiers are not allowed to speak freely, how are we as a public going to protect our freedom by knowing if in fact the truth is being stated honestly or deceptively.
I did not care about Clinton’s sex life, but I do care about where MY country takes us in the world of humanity. No one person is MORE important than another, NO human life is worth more than another. Killing people in the name of peace? Give me a break, the only difference between them and us is the ocean that separates us.
The same people who made a huge deal about sexual lies, are now fabricating lie after lie. A lie concerning sex that has no harm to the rest of the public means nothing to me. Any lie involving death and or destruction of property DOES concern me.
The media should act in the interest of the members of society, rather than conforming to the interests of money.
Posted by Terry Meadows on Aug 11, 2003 at 3:04 PM I believe that if the media were to continue delving into the fabrications and distortions of the Bush regime, impeachment of that empty shell of a human being would surely follow. Bush has tainted the office of the presidency in a way that would make Nixon blush. Republicans scramble to cover their tracks with new reasons for the invasion as their old ones are quickly discovered to be fiction rather than fact. The media owes the public factually based reports, not just pre-digested columns prepared for them by the administration. Many of them are no more than spokesmen for the administration, but some still possess a conscience, and are now begginning to see the light. Unfortunately, the dyed-in-wool- republican media will always justify administration policy (Limbaugh,O’Reilley, FoxNews etc.),and fail to ask tough questions, because to question would make you un-patriotic, and we all know that righteous republican media outlets will goose-step in line with Bush and Co. regardless of where that may lead them.
Posted by jj on Aug 12, 2003 at 1:51 PM Has the media rediscovered its spine, or has the message come down from the media top that the Bush/Rumsfeld/Cheney “team”—inextricable Iraq mess, unstartable economy—has become a liability?
Posted by Arthur Mitzman on Aug 16, 2003 at 3:18 AM What has been ignored in all this is the changed character of the press. Rent the movie “Front Page” (Grant/RRussell) and you see the 4th Estate as it once was. Gritty, pushy, hardscrabble--part of the people.
Today’s press (I live among them in Georgetown) are divas, lunching with lobbyists and politicians, collecting rich honoraria from universities, councils and clubs. Co-opted, the lot of them. Can you picture George Will scaling a boxwood with a pencil behind his ear? Mort Kondracke caught without a Hermes tie? Please.
Such people do not ask hard questions of the establishment because they are PART of it. Bush press conferences are polite preppy scrums.
Last year the Sidwell Friends School auction solicted bids on an “Evening of Pundocracy” with Al Hunt and Judy Woodruff. Which way to the vomitorium!
We have reached a pretty pass when our only popular adverse commentary is in ONION, a satire magazine.Austin in DC
Posted by ATS on Aug 17, 2003 at 8:23 AM Ms. Douglas story seems to suggest that the coporate media-is turning against the war; sees what Bush has engineered in the way of a national security state; and is about to “blow the whislte.” What planet is she on? The corporate media continue to dumbfound the American public, where they cannot confuse them. A casual listen to NPR- “the liberal/progressive” radio network- will perhaps serve to enlighten her: whether its NPR ace reporter Scott Simon abjuring his Quakerism to support the war, or Cokie Roberts and husband trumpeting the conservative agenda- while masking their reportage as progressive journalism. The media has evinced a servility so deep that the Borgias appear egalitarian in comparison. Lets not get all smary over the occasional corporate attempt at “fair and balenced” reportage. In short, Ms. Douglas manages to confuse the spin with the reality. The media has already been “embedded” in all senses.. don’t try it with the public.
Warren Leming
Posted by warren leming on Aug 18, 2003 at 8:58 AM Warren is spot on. The media is corporate and faux liberal. Eric Alterman’s WHAT LIBERAL MEDIA makes the point that only THE NATION would be considered liberal media in the UK.
Why does one always hear that the media is liberal? One reason is that the right keeps saying it is, in hope of wangling “fair” airtime (Alterman: “working the refs’).The other reason is that many media people are socially liberal but conservative in foreign policy and fiscal matters (because they have become “haves.").ATS in DC
Posted by ATS on Aug 18, 2003 at 11:10 AM Susan J. Douglas, you have made my day! My summer has suddenly become much better! A margarita to you!
Posted by Benjamin Rubicam on Aug 18, 2003 at 2:04 PM you can’t be liberal socially and conservative fiscally, i know people say they are but they can’t be. Isn’t the fiscal conserv. attitude to lower spending and the liberal social attitude to increase spending (domestic)?
is it possible that our media is fair? everyone on the left says its biased to the right and the people on the right say that there is a liberal media.
Posted by john on Aug 18, 2003 at 6:57 PM For centuries, the main battle has been between the privileged few and the landless masses.
Nothing much has changed. Now instead of conspiratorial monarchies, we have corporations and mega-investors, defined as the ‘National Interest’.
The governments only acceptable role is to facilitate investment and protect private property. Any delusion that the National Interest includes the general population is laughable.True Democracy is a dangerous threat to the privileged few, as it may empower the many to take what is rightly theirs. Wherever true democracy emerges (e.g. el salvador , nicoragua, chile, USA) it is crushed.
A key characteristic of ‘neo-liberal’ structures is the ‘apoliticizing’ of the many through a concerted media onslaught. Remove political relevance and foster hopelessness and you’ve eliminated the poorest half of voters from participating.
So, both major parties are slaves to the masters: the ‘National Interest’; ‘guided’ to articulate policy designed to shape the world to be as beneficial as possible for the super-rich, while conning the middle classes into thinking they may one day attain the same level.
In 19th Century America, wage-based employment was considered little better than slavery. The masters have expertly reduced our expectations of life. We accept that we have no right to life outside of serving the masters.
When the mainstream media can broach these and other fundamental truths, as well as conceding their complicity in helping make it happen, then, and only then can we say that the corporate media have reformed.
What kind of world do you want today?
Posted by Matt Quinn on Aug 19, 2003 at 7:04 AM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Susan J. Douglas
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1972 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
459 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2003 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
