| May 2012 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
Yesterday the LA TIMES ran a front-page story on blogger Michael Yon. Here's the headline and subhead:
Lone Gun in War Reporting
Michael Yon's blog made him a hero among backers of the effort in Iraq. As his profile grew, so did debate on the quality of his work.
So, per the subhead, the whole article is about questioning "the quality of his work." The article includes statements such as:
Yon's emergence from obscurity is emblematic of Internet-age journalism, in which a lone writer with little experience can build a significant following by deeply mining a specialized niche. In the blogosphere, opinions fly with abandon. Unconventional characters thrive who would make the mainstream media blanch.
Isn't that something? Per the LA TIMES, the blogosphere is a place filled with "unconventional characters" who would make MSM "blanch" and who "let opinions fly with abandon!" Evidently, per the LA TIMES, bloggers are irresponsible people nobody should take seriously.
Meanwhile, today, we find out an example of MSM flagship, the NY TIMES, printing a gratuitous statement pejorative to GWB which -- had they read their own paper -- they would know was untrue. From Drudge:
White House seeking a retraction from NYT: Bush was 'on vacation in Texas'
Fri Feb 10 2006 09:46:25 ET
NEW YORK TIMES' Eric Lipton today writes that President Bush was "on vacation in Texas" on August 30th but their own reporter filed a pool report that day from San Diego where POTUS giving a speech on the War on Terror and was visiting soldiers and families of the fallen. Sources tell DRUDGE that the original story filed by Lipton did not contain the sentence about Bush being on vacation and that it was added by an editor.
The White House is seeking a retraction.
Isn't it evident that MSM has a conflict of interest when it criticizes its own new-media competition?
One more point on this LA TIMES article about Yon. It contains the following:
Would the mainstream media have kept him on the job after the day he grabbed a soldier's rifle (during an alley fight in Mosul) and fired off several rounds at the enemy?
This appears to me to be an astonishing statement. There's an alley fight, bullets are flying, people are trying to kill not only Yon but also the American soldiers he's with -- and the LA TIMES objects to him doing something to save his life and those of the American soldiers? On what possible grounds could the LA TIMES object to this?
The LA TIMES states that this would even be considered grounds for firing!
What on earth is the LA TIMES talking about? If I had to make a choice between getting killed, or letting a U.S. soldier get killed, and getting fired by MSM, I would rather get fired by MSM.
Nothing could make it more evident that if you're in a fight, you don't want MSM watching your back.
This is a perfect parable. America is in a fight with terrorists, and per the LA TIMES, MSM reporters would be fired for helping save the life of a U.S. soldier.
Can you imagine being an American soldier in that alley in Mosul, and turning and seeing a reporter from the LA TIMES sitting on his hands while people are shooting at you? Well, that's the behavior the LA TIMES demands from its fine reporters.
This might as well be the LA TIMES motto:
MSM: the last people on Earth you want around when people are shooting at you.
(The fourth non-quoted paragraph of this article has been corrected. Thanks to commenter Frank for pointing out the error. The previous version of that paragraph is here.)
#1
#2You're right about that. I'll correct it.
#3The paragraph has been corrected. The old version of that paragraph read:
Meanwhile, today, we find out yet another example of how the LA TIMES' own editors put in a gratuitous statement pejorative to GWB which -- had they read their own paper -- they would know was untrue. From Drudge:
Hilarious. Blaming the Los Angeles Times for something in the New York Times? I think it's time you admitted you have a problem.
If the shoe fits...