The State of Media on the Right

And of course one media outlet that is identified as representing the views of the right is Fox News. They draw a big audience and show that there is an appetitie for this type of reporting. However, they offer "one stop shopping" for critcism from the left. The personalities have replaced the coverage (O'Reilly, for example), and become an easy target.

I would like to see more diverse outlets of right oriented coverage. That way the reporting would not be so easily dismissed.

The current Dr. Tiller and Private Long murders are a good example. The left has controlled coverage, and put the right on defense very successfully.

LGF broke the story about "Rathergate".  Without right-wing media, the "tea parties" would've been non-events. Right-wing media was responsible for then candidate Barack Obama distancing himself from Reverend Wright. Right-wing media are the only people researching and following through on Obama's stimulus package, and his budget.

Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think that the entire point of the article is invalid. It isn't that right-wing media has done a poor job of reporting, it's that it's done a poor job of getting those reports heard. 

Why is this?  It's because the left-wing media won't bother to advance any story brought up by right-wing media, or if it does mention such a story, it's with a critical eye. However, the right-wing media will do further research or advance a story initially advanced in left-wing media, such a "Troopergate" and "Plamegate".

The Left does not have an 11th Commandment.  Obama is hearing a much criticism from people who voted for him as from people who didn't.

Come to think of it, Rush Limbaugh doesn't pay much attention to the 11th Commandment.

But it is true that the liberal blogs are light years ahead in hard news.  As an example, Marcy Wheeler of Emptywheel has read thousands of boring pages of documents in order to find the parts that matter, and has broken big stories on torture using publicly available information. 

TPM, like a police officer studying a serial killer operating in several jurisdictions, pulled together isolated reports of US Attorney firings and found a pattern.

Anyone on the right doing that?

If the right grew up hoping to be the next Bill Buckley...where is he (or she)?

...is clearly revealed by this sentence from the article:  "Talking Points Memo, one of the more evolved liberal news sites, won a Polk award in 2007 for its work unraveling the U.S. Attorneys firing scandal."  U.S. Attorneys, distinguished from lower-level or lower ranking attorneys who work in a U.S. Attorney's Office, are purely political appointees.  They have no job protections - apart perhaps from some whistle-blower and civil rights laws - and serve at the pleasure of the sitting President of the United States.  The extent of the uproar over President Bush's firing of eight U.S. Attorneys and the twistings and turnings as well as the completely incompetent handling of the non-issue by his administration reveals the power of the left-dominated media.  It also reveals his inability to face down the incredibly idiotic rantings that sometimes dominate the media.  (Imagine, for contrast, President Harry Truman being confronted on that issue.  There's an imagine for an editorial cartoon at least!)  His answer ought to have been something like this:  "I'm the President.  They work directly for me and serve at my pleasure.  No other official is required to agree with my decision and no justification or reason is required for me to fire the men and women who hold this office.  If you object so strenuously to it, begin impeachment proceedings.  Otherwise, end of story."  Note also that none of the outraged editors, commentators, or pundits seemed to recall that President Clinton fired all 92 of the U.S. Attorneys and that the media made nothing of it at the time.  The liberal/progressive ... whatever label you care to use, the dominance of the media by President Obama's supporters seems quite complete and unshakeable.  And Republicans and other conservatives are, as several have mentioned, chasing their own tails as it were rather than doing something constructive about the situation.  Ah, well. 

So WE'LL act like the trained Rhoesus Monkeys over at TPM with their Soros money and investigate only Democratic Scandals?

Jesus. TPM won that award because the people giving out the award were both professional jouranalists and, I suspect, people who were happy with the political result of the investigation. The US attorney scandal is one of the biggest invented scams since the Valerie Plame "scandal".

If I had my own bought and paid for State Media I could invent scandals, too.

Which, of course, is your whole point: we need our own trained Monkeys like Yglesias and Josh Marshall who are at the beck and call of some rich Republican and who's mission in life is to investigate Democrats. That will eventually happen, but first the Right needs to grow a freaking brain, re-read Rules for Radicals, and understand that Democrats practice scorched earth politics and that two need to play at that game.

Bush never got that. Which is why he ended up like his Dad. 

The point is, stop taking scraps from the liberal media. Example: You are thrown a bone like 'dealergate' and you run with it like a pack of hungry wolves. Stop the madness! Wait, don't. :)

http://mashable.com/2009/06/03/npr/

Compared to cable news, where most networks are shedding viewers, and newspapers, where circulation continues to plummet, NPR is starting to look like they have the future of news all figured out. Or at least, they appear to doing a lot better at it than the rest of the traditional media.

But what is NPR doing differently that’s causing their listener numbers to swell? They basically have a three-pronged strategy that is helping them not only grow now, but also prepare for the future media landscape where traditional methods of consumption (TV, radio, print) could be greatly marginalized in favor of digital distribution.

NPR would be a evil liberal news outlet, but they are also incredibly successful. People even GIVE them money every quarter. No commercials.

I think Jon's post is simply pointing out that you can't just build a propaganda machine on a couple pundits with strong persoanlities. You need to build an organzation that searches and respects facts. Yes, you (and NPR) can have an agenda, but it's strengthened by research and reporting.

The Right has also run from any kind of local reporting. This is one reason why Rush is always screaming about the boogieman Fairness doctrine. He does not want ANY requirement for local news stations to have local news. They like computer operated radio stations with pre-programmed content from far away. This is strange for a people who like "down home" things.

I would love to see more conservative media outlets go beyond the talking points and really get into facts. Long stories. Let people talk. Discussion. Listening.

what sort of hacker aspires to be Woodward?

Believe it or not, some people are actually interested in facts. It's kinda fun.

The Idea that conservatives feel like they have to engineer fact-oriented people is just more support for the authoritarian mindset of many modern conservatives (umm... technical terms alert. not insults. )

What springs to mind with you, in terms of winners and losers? Air Jordan Nike Air Max shox shoes Nike Kobe jordans