WP: "Media rage on the left...now matches that on the right."

[DeepModem Mom]

Thunder on the Left
By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, July 21, 2006

In an online chat the other day, someone got mad at me for saying that there was as much anger toward the media on the left these days as there has always been on the right.

After all, haven't a couple of conservative bomb-throwers said that journalists should be tried, convicted, hung, shot and otherwise disrespected for spilling national security secrets?

True, and I haven't come across any liberal opinion-mongers wishing quite the same fate on card-carrying journalists. But let's not make the mistake of confusing the views of a few extremists with those of everyone on their side of the spectrum.

Trust me when I say that many liberals are really ticked off at the MSM, even though the nature of their criticism is very different from their rivals on the right. The anger that liberals feel over media coverage of President Bush and the war is tinged with deep disappointment over journalistic shortcomings and a hope, however vain, that things can be improved. Why aren't you on our side? The anger among conservatives is fed by decades of feeling that the MSM is a bastion of bias, and a sense of futility that things will ever change. Why can't we get an even break?

Now my view has been echoed, in no less liberal a journal than the Nation, by Lakshmi Chaudhry: "The media rage on the left--at least among those politically active online--now matches that on the right."...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/04/11/LI2005041100587.html

Link to The Nation, "Rage Against the MSMachine":

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060731/chaudhry

"...where the right-wing blogosphere accuses journalists of ideological bias, the progressive netroots view them as corrupt and compromised."

[Atman]

1. "Rage Against the MSMachine." OMG! I love it!

Wish I'd thought of it.

[tanyev]

2. Nice of him to clarify that the threats of grievous bodily harm are

coming from the right.

[rucky]

3. The "liberal media" meme was created to muddy the waters

and help "catapult the propaganda."

If the media really thought they've been reporting down the middle this whole time, they should've stood their ground to the liberal-media critcism back when Rush Limbaugh created it - instead of giving in to pressure.

[RedStateShame]

5. I thought Nixon created the term "liberal media"....

Or at least the attacks...maybe "liberal" was the nice way of saying what Nixon probably called "Jew-run."

[rucky]

9. You're probably right.

Have you heard that "Liberal Jew-run Media" sound clip they always play on Majority Report? LOL.

[eShirl]

4. wtf "Why aren't you on our side?"

More like, why won't you do your forking jobs?

[Supersedeas]

17. that's Kutz's means of framing rage over lack of journalistic integrity

Kutz is a shill

[Demit]

6. Howie Kurz wants me to trust him when he says something? LOL!

[wryter2000]

7. Yeah, right

Do you see where this...

After all, haven't a couple of conservative bomb-throwers said that journalists should be tried, convicted, hung, shot and otherwise disrespected for spilling national security secrets?

True, and I haven't come across any liberal opinion-mongers wishing quite the same fate on card-carrying journalists.

...maybe contradicts this, Kurtz?

"The media rage on the left--at least among those politically active online--now matches that on the right."...

It's kind of like "the Abramoff thing is a bipartisan scandal even though no Democrats are involved."

Asshole. :mad:

[bryant69]

8. Total Bullshit

The real answer is is this - the lazy dumbass media finds criticisms from the left more disturbing becaue they are rooted in the truth! Right Wing Media Criticism is largely factless; and there's little they could actually do to appease the right. But if they wanted to make us happy they'd have to work harder and take more risks.

And of course, deep in their lazy dumbass hearts, they know that the left is making some good points. So they need to defang us, so as to avoid having to do any extra work.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[sendero]

14. Yep...

... I've given up on the media, and I hope every lying lazy warmongering one of them meet an end that would make Karma proud.

[NewJeffCT]

16. yes, the media could certainly appease the right!

They could all become like Fox News on TV, or the Washington Times/NY Post in print, or like Rush on the radio...

[grasswire]

10. No, Howard, no.

Once again, the husband of a right-wing nuthatch has gotten it wrong.

It isn't that we on the left want the media on "our side." We simply want them to tell the truth.

And we specifically want them to stop setting up these goddam false equivalencies.

[chill_wind]

11. He's right about ONE thing.

I DO view them largely as corrupt and comprimised.

"...where the right-wing blogosphere accuses journalists of ideological bias, the progressive netroots view them as corrupt and compromised."

[jsamuel]

12. "right-wing blogosphere accuses journalists of ideological bias"

we do that too.

Like when one of your reporters tries to make the Abramoff scandal a "bipartisan" scandal, there is definitely something ideologically going wrong with that reporter.

[zbdent]

13. If the repukes didn't use the examples of the few extremists (on the left)

then they wouldn't have anything to base their anger on to show "how evil" the liberals are ... whereas we can use the examples of the not-too extreme (by today's standards) Right to show how sick they are ...

[NewJeffCT]

18. The difference is...

Ward Churchill was an obscure college professor that nobody, except for a few college students in Colorado, had ever heard of. He makes a few comments about 9/11 and he is instantly a national celebrity. He is not a star of the Democratic speaking circuit, a guest at Democratic fundraisers, a regular talking head on TV or radio, etc.

Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Michael Savage, etc make remarks that are even more extreme than Churchill. However, the difference is that Coulter is a very prominent Republican, as is Malkin, as is Savage, as is Limbaugh, etc. and all of these people are popular guests in Republican circles, be it as a talking head on TV or as a speaker at a fundraiser.

[gumby]

15. Howie Kurtz as a "Media Critic" is an oxymoron.

And Howie is a spoiled, pampered, arrogant and elitist moron.

Phooey!!!