From "Jen Psaki, Once the Voice of Biden, Moves to an Anchor Chair The former White House press secretary will start hosting a weekly MSNBC talk show on March 19. As for the president, “I am not going to gratuitously attack him'" (NYT).
"MSNBC viewers may not care either way. In this tribal moment in media and politics, Americans tend to flock to news sources that reaffirm their beliefs. When George Stephanopoulos moved from Bill Clinton’s White House to ABC News in 1996, it set off alarm bells among media ethicists. That was a less partisan era.'"
Yeah, I don't think anyone cares. The shows are so biased, what difference does it make if these characters flow back and forth between politics and journalism? And do we even have "media ethicists" anymore? Who's playing that game of charades?
Posts
43 comments:
"Yeah, I don't think anyone cares. The shows are so biased, what difference does it make if these characters flow back and forth between politics and journalism?"
Well, I care, a little. The difference it makes is that, while conservatives occasionally have one outlet, most of the MSM absorbs most of the prog activists. The institutions of American society all serve to maintain the prog power elite--MSM shows, Harvard fellowships, non-profit "jobs," government grants, cushy Netflix deals, Biden Centers and Clinton Foundations, etc. etc. The issue is not "bias," but the power of our overlords.
It's not hypocrisy, exactly. It's really just self-congratulatory stupidity. Liberals think that liberals are more trustworthy and therefore we don't need to keep so close an eye on them.
It's similar to the idea that only conservatism is a bias. Liberalism isn't a bias, it's just plain common sense decency. All sorts of corruption are ok when engaged in by the left because they're the good guys. Just like despotism is ok when the despot is a lefty--because it's well-meaning oppression.
Unlike MSNBC and ABC, weren't the two Trump women brought on as contributors and co-hosting panelists, not anchor-executive editors?
https://press.foxnews.com/2019/08/fox-news-signs-sarah-huckabee-sanders-to-contributor-role
Kayleigh McEnany
Co-Host of Outnumbered. Kayleigh McEnany currently serves as co-host of Outnumbered (weekdays, 12 PM/ET) on FOX News Channel. McEnany also contributes across all of FOX News Media platforms as an on-air commentator. She joined the network in March 2021.
Let's go back farther than that: CBS formerly employed the aggressive Democratic Party agenda mouthpiece Mike Wallace on 60 Minutes, while ABC employed Sam Donaldson who shouted questions at Reagan.
They were likely as biased, but had a captive network audience and didn't have to fend off the small Internet and cable TV channels. "Do as I say not as I do."
I cut the cord several years ago, primarily because I did not want any portion of my subscription payments to to Rachel Maddow. So I do not care and am more of less insulated from this. But I do listen to these channels on the radio when driving, and I have this query. Why is there so much attention to news? By that I mean, isn't there something bizarre about having 24 hour, or even 12 hour, or even 3 hours of coverage of national and international news? And the format? A panel of folks who have an unhealthy interest in what ever is the current thing to catch their attention sitting around and spewing sentences? What is this all about? What is really going on here?
liberals cried foul about a 'revolving door' and claimed the Murdoch-owned network was an extension of the Trump White House
Lazy reporter. Why not actually quote one of those so-called liberals, and then ask them, today, about Psaki's hire.
"Media ethics" are now largely handled via private litigation. See, e.g., Thomas Clare and Clare Locke, LLP.
Anyway, Althouse, I am mostly with you on this nothingburger. "Former administration official joins ____ News Channel" is the dog-bites-man story of the century.
What's funny is when even the former Administration officials can't get hired. At least not by any normal cable outlet. Sebastian Gorka went from Fox News, to the Trump Administration, to... where? Lara Trump was on the Fox News Channel, until she wasn't. Sean Spicer, Rudy, Jason Miller...?
There is "Biased, partisan former Administration Official." Then, there is "Too fucking crazy to go anywhere that is even close to being a serious outlet. Even Fox won't take them."
"Circle back" Winne-Psaki would feel more at home at the Daytona 500 oval.
Since it's MSNBC I will find it easily to ignore her biased BS on that network just as I ignored her biased BS when she was at the WH. All press secretaries are paid liars for their president, and anyone who expects a paid liar to suddenly become an objective journalist deserves MSNBC.
Partisanship aside, even the young cable commentators/wiseacres I like are pretty damn ignorant.
Those well-honed lying skills are being put to profitable use of big and bigger government,
Ethics and morality assume a common internalized standard of behavior shared by all. A big part of the privileges of being a Progressive is that such standards are merely useful tools in seizing power or limiting the power of those "on the wrong side of history." Once in a position of consolidating its power, the Left is only constrained in showing its open contempt for such standards to the extent it sees their continuing usefulness of limiting its opponents.
With the rise of Trump and others on the Right who refuse to play this one-sided game, expect to see Progressives openly abandon any pretense of caring about neutral standards of ethics or morality. We see it already in the Left's utter silence on politicization of the FBI and government interference in free speech.
ha ha ha
NYT trying to be "fair" and "balanced" and they are
30 years behind the fucking times
We're in the 21st century now NYT
try to catch up, you old white lady
ain't calling you "gray" fuck that
you're white as mayo
white bread
whiter than crackers
I don't care how many black and brown people you add to try to make your paper "street"
they all went to the Ivy League and they all talk like they are white, white, white, white inside an oreo white
Vanilla! Shut up you vanilla cream pie! Nobody cares!
It used to be that Democrat fucking media
would say nice things about Republicans
when they were out of office
you fuckers are so bad now
you're still screaming about Trump
and trying to put him in prison
and he's out of office, what, two years now?
you looking for rabid partisan idiots?
go to the bathroom
close the door
turn on the light
and look in that mirror
You named an airport for Reagan
Find something nice to say about George W. Bush
or Donald Trump
give either of them a fucking award for something
or fuck you
apologize to Nixon and say he probably shouldn't have resigned
maybe "we went to far hounding him"
and you might add that it was a classy move resigning
no president is ever going to resign again
I wonder whose fault that is?
you dumb fucking reporters
"Yeah, I don't think anyone cares"
No reason to care if you don't watch any of that stuff. Can't imagine why anyone would waste the time doing so. Except on election nights, I never tune into Fox or MSNBC or CNN or PBS (among others); never bother with the Sunday morning stuff, 60 Minutes (is it still on air?) or the like. To the extent there is any need to stay current with any of them about what may be their talking point of the day, happily enough there are those (like Ann or Instapundit) who will pay enough attention to make it easy for you.
Life is short. Be guided accordingly.
Nixon falls on his sword and you fuckers are still jumping up and down on his body
I loath the "mainstream" press
the more I think about you fucks, the madder I get
not getting a dime from me
hope you all go out of business, that's how angry I am
I don’t mind the bias. The bias can be good if you watch different stations. The thing I can’t bear is the made up stories such as Russian collusion or referring to J6 as an “Insurrection”. Innocent people have had their lives upended over these types of lies. That’s when the so-called journalists should be vociferously fired.
I’m shocked, shocked to find political partisans have infiltrated the noble profession of journalism.
If we all pretend it’s 1996 the Psaki story will seem more interesting.
And you couldn’t pay me to watch any of it
Then, there is "Too fucking crazy to go anywhere that is even close to being a serious outlet. Even Fox won't take them."
I am surprised at your self-awareness, Chuck. I know you must be disappointed in your failure to find media work (outside your heroic efforts on this site).
Keep hope alive, Chuck.
Max Wax
@MaxWax123456
Replying to
@Variety
It’s called “ Psaki: Lies from the Oval Office”
10:50 AM · Feb 21, 2023
I've noted before that in the nineteenth century most American newspapers were fronts for the political parties; many made that explicit with Republican or Democrat appearing in their very names. Polling today shows the vast majority of the public believes news organizations are thoroughly biased in a manner that would have seen perfectly normal in the nineteenth century, so I recommend we simply append party affiliations to the names of news organizations whether they like it or not: The New York Times-Democrat, The Washington Post-Democrat, Fox Republican News, etc. Call it truth-in-advertising.
We all know that everything is a revolving door in Washington corrupt town now. All CIA/FBI/DOJ/aides all get huge salaries selling influence once they leave. Then they come back, gain more influence and then sell that as well.
We know they are crooks, we just tend to ignore it if they aren't blatant crooks.
Or or or... the CIA and FBI losers/liars who hack-for-dollars on CNN.
I'm pushing 80, so ignore what I say, but I still remember Huntley-Brinkley as the gold standard of TV news reporting (I even remember "John Cameron Swazey with the News" before them). Yes, of course, THEY WERE BIASED, but we didn't know that yet, because in their time the differences between US and THEM (we wouldn't have known to say "between liberals and conservatives") weren't regarded as being all THAT IMPORTANT. I think that in the aftermath of WWII and in the early years of the COLD WAR there was a fairly large portion of the populace that could agree with each other on most political issues, and could tolerate disagreements on most other issues. Of course, it was the "McCarthy Era", but didn't Ike oppose that? I won't say I "miss the 50's", because I look forward to the 2023's -- but that's just me.
So why shouldn’t Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Kayleigh McEnany, and Jen Psaki follow the trail that George Stephanopoulos blazed? Is it because they are women?
'I am not going on television to be a mouthpiece.'
Now pull the other one.
Is this an example of media corruption? Sure, but maybe it's small "c" corruption so we can live with it. Was Psaki negotiating with MSNBC for $$$ while taking and answering their questions as WH press secretary? That's what I'd like to know.
An example of big "C" corruption would be the CIA/FBI/DOJ officials illegally leaking (or even telling convenient lies) to media organizations and then going to work for those media organizations after they retire. There isn't a tree high enough to hang those SOBs.
that guy, that wrote the daisy H-bomb ad for LBJ? How long was he on PBS?
Humperdink said...
"Circle back" Winne-Psaki would feel more at home at the Daytona 500 oval."
Well, she is all about all left turns.
Earnest Prole: "The New York Times-Democrat, The Washington Post-Democrat, Fox Republican News, etc. Call it truth-in-advertising."
The New York Times-Democrat, The Washington Post-Democrat, Fox Establishment News, etc. Call it truth-in-advertising.
For it to be "truth-in-advertising, it has to be accurate.
One of the cool things about His Girl Friday is that the movie identifies the politics of the newspaper.
So honest!
Where is that honesty today?
Our fucking TV networks never acknowledge their political bias. Everybody knows Fox is Republican. But try to get a liberal to acknowledge that MSNBC or CNN or ABC or CBS or NBC is biased in favor of Democrats. Instead they pretend like these networks are normal and Fox is unspeakably evil and must be silenced and run from the airwaves.
and claimed the Murdoch-owned network was an extension of the Trump White House. Those voices have said little about Ms. Psaki’s migration to MSNBC
Of course. The rules are always different for the Good Guys.
"media ethics" reminds me of "business ethics"
As the Bradley Whitford character in Billy Madison says "The thing about business ethics... is... Aaagh!"
Meh. Seems like a little bit of Truth in Advertising from MSDNC.
About the only Truth you will find there, but no biggie.
Press Secretaries are often selected for their ability to present complex issues and positions in a manner that is palatable to the public (the incumbent may be an exception). The qualifications and requirements for a news anchor position are similar. In fact I have often wondered why anyone would take on the press secretary position, other than as an audition for another job, as it seems to be a thankless task.
Conservative: Fox News
Progressive leftwing Democrat:
ABC
CBS
NBC
NYT
NPR
MSNBC
WaPo
LATimes
PBS
VanityFair
RollingStone
AllGRrrlMags
Seems fair.
No wonder the collective authoritarian left are frightened of ONE source that doesn't comply with the narrative hive-mind progressive on the road to neo-Marxist group-think. Scary Fox News!
Earnest Prole said...
I've noted before that in the nineteenth century most American newspapers were fronts for the political parties....
True. Whenever I get really annoyed by this stuff I try to recall that "the press" was always highly partisan.
True. Whenever I get really annoyed by this stuff I try to recall that "the press" was always highly partisan.
Yes but they did not pretend to be neutral. Also, have you ever read an 1860 newspaper?
The language and reasoning would be above the level of a Harvard graduate today. Read the Lincoln Douglas debates for example.
The issue is these things are not comparable. There is a big difference between being a talking head on a news show and being a journalist. A political insider is actually useful as a talking head, as they know what goes on behind the scenes and they can effectively argue the partisan position. A journalist is supposed to be neutral and once you are a partisan mouthpiece it is impossible to be taken seriously as a journalist. Not that the MSNBC audience cares about such things, and, for that matter, journalists in general these days.
The main problem with talking heads these days is not that they are partisan, but that they are fake partisan. A large percentage of "conservative" or "Republican" talking heads are either more interested in fighting their own people or are outright on the other side.
The relativistic, selective religion of ethics. NYT is correct, throw another baby on the barbie, it's a progressive condition.
Post a Comment