My email to Washington Post commenting on "The Rules of Punditry"

[roseBudd]

by Fred Hiatt
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45982-2005Jan28.html


First of all I commend both USA Today and the Washington Post for bringing to light this situation. Like many people I have often felt that some of the pundits on the right surely were in it for the money and perhaps an eager audience. By money I meant syndicated contracts, book deals, and cable news appearances. I felt this way because certain pundits rarely if ever have anything critical to say about anything republican, whether people or policy. To find out the profit motive was even more insidious is chilling.

The most disturbing aspect is what are we to think of a government that uses propaganda? In my mind this is the real meat of this story.

Report: PR spending doubled under Bush
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=676&e=5&u=/usatoday/reportprspendingdoubledunderbush

[EFerrari]

1. Have you noticed that "journalists" are distancing themselves

from those naughty "columnists"?

And you have to love this:

"Bush said Wednesday that he does not think taxpayer money should be used to promote administration policies in that way. "I expect my Cabinet secretaries to make sure that that practice doesn't go forward," he said at a White House news conference."

W is the best imaginable example of American product placement. Do you think he knows?

lol

[The Backlash Cometh]

2. Nice letter, but brace yourself, because I'm sure there will be

names released in the near future from pundits who claim to be Democrats. Be prepared to give them the boot too.

[roseBudd]

3. Who would pay liberal pundits to editorialize? The DNC?

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. I never said "liberal." I said pundits who claim to be Democrats.

[roseBudd]

5. those are the ones that are described as liberal, what entity would be

paying them?