The Rise Of New Media Watchdogs
By K. Daniel Glover | September 23, 2009
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council isn't surprised that President Obama is open to the idea of a newspaper bailout, but Perkins knows a bad idea when he hears one.
He led this week's edition of his "Washington Update" with a newspaper bailout blurb headlined "Bad News Bores." Perkins noted Obama's contempt for new media outlets but also emphasized why those outlets are so important:
While it is not unusual for a president to seek favors for a constituency that overwhelmingly supported him, such a bailout would bring into question the partiality of the "mainstream media" even more. The president spoke in fear of the "blogosphere" being "all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context."
First, it is always bad economic policy to reward outdated businesses that refuse to adapt. From Monica Lewinsky to Dan Rather it was the internet that broke the stories that "mainstream media" refused to. Additionally, it is online sources, including FRCAction's own Cloakroom blog, that are keeping the debate over health care honest and as transparent as possible.
Under such scrutiny, it is no wonder that other leading Democrats, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., are also looking for ways to use federal tax dollars to bailout newspaper conglomerates. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom of the press. It would be a shame if the media establishment gave away that freedom in exchange for a few coins.
Amen to that. But a few coins aren't going to salvage the traditional media's sinking reputation or deter the new media watchdogs who have been keeping them in check.
K. Daniel Glover is a project manager for Accuracy In Media. He has worked as an editor, writer and new media specialist in the Washington area since 1991, spending most of that time at National Journal and Congressional Quarterly.
8 Comments | Post a Comment
Unless it is a major newspaper it is not news. I suppose that is the thinking of Obama and cohorts. The truth is these newspaper are the ones that witheld important facts from the voters last election.
Under a barrage of MSNBC many are forced to watch a venomous attack on anything that is conservative or of moral value, not because of the issues,but because those who defend morality are inherently sinners.
Sad for Maddow, we are all sinners, we all fall down , fall short and have to get up and start again. That is the wonder of Faith in the forgiveness of sins. So before the Liberals assault the values of conservatives, let them first look at themselves in the mirror. Even they have to stand before the Law
The new media will be censored, old media will be subsidized.
People want to complain but do nothing about it. While they’re busy par-taying and spending all their time on social sites, anyone who talks politics is shunned. The only time you’ll hear from these submissive nonchalant individuals is when the freedom is gone and they say “Where’d it go George?”
No one wants to hear about the government until the actual day they awaken to a knock on the door for your guns, your oath to the NWO and a mandatory shot for the latest bogus virus outbreak.
It took me a long time of reading many columns and much MSM to find the genuine ones who really know what’s happening and who report the truth whether its left-truth or right-truth. And there ain’t too many of them around anymore.
There are too many dummies in our country who take all MSM at their word. It’s sad but I don’t believe anything anymore: from MSM or the government. It’s all either lies, or so twisted around that a literary professional can’t decipher most of the swimming jargon they dish out.
Obama has a way with words, as we all know, and dummies actually believe everything that comes out of his mouth. He can actually tell people what they want to hear but actually, with his context, make it sound the complete opposite of what he’s saying or better yet he tells you what you want to hear but leaves out the punch line. For instance, he promised he would NOT pass anything that would allow illegal aliens to have health care. What he DOESN’T say is all the illegal aliens will soon be legal. He says the senior citizens have nothing to worry about with “death panels” because there won’t be any death panels. What he doesn’t tell you is the doctor who chooses to discuss end-of-life procedures will get extra bonuses for choosing to talk to you. He tells you H1N1 is a dangerous virus and everyone should get their shots. What he doesn’t tell you is the big companies who backed him for the presidency will reap a harvest. He tells you the health bill is a “good thing”. What he doesn’t tell you is the percentage of doctors who will land up quitting their profession and we will be in a whirlwind of pulling our own teeth, dieing of a terminal illness in the waiting rooms anticipating the arrival of 1 of the 3 doctors in the ER, who will not shiv a get because their salaries are capped.
Every time I turn on the television I see a new drug out. Good Gawd——the side effects are worse than the original problem! (Has anyone noticed how many new drugs are being advertised on tv in the past year?) I’m not going to be a guinea pig! I’ll take an aspirin and continue to listen to the voices in my head.
Obama gets past the constitutionality by loopholes all the time. Add to that a bunch of dummies who only voted because he’s got African blood, and you have a bunch of dummies who think anything he says is okay with them because Obama said “Yes we can”. “Yes we can…What?” Yes we can create a living hell for you and you won’t even know it until it’s too late.
Someone should go to the ACLU and see if they would take the government to court over “breach of our religious rights”. After all, they’ve defended both sides of the coin before.
If the ACLU can win on one side for breached non-religious rights then they should defend people on the other side for breach of religious rights because a Christian’s rights are just as American as an atheist’s rights…..more so, since our country was founded on Christianity to begin with.
The only drawback I see as far as constitutional adherence right now is the fact that anytime We The People try to fight the government it is usually dismissed as frivolous and tossed out…..unless you belong to ACORN, the Fed, are a terrorist or a democrat.
What do you expect from a bunch of COMMUNISTS that slid in under the msm radar .... Just more ANGST for all of us “RIGHT-WING EXTREMISTS” !!!
The msm is broken ... and “they” don’t even know it ... and they will NEVER admit it ...
BILL COWAN
“BEAUTIFUL” Sherman, TEXAS
re: post #5 - “Add to that a bunch of dummies who only voted because he’s got African blood, and you have a bunch of dummies who think anything he says is okay with them because Obama said “Yes we can”. “Yes we can…What?”
I would contend that if Obama were several shades darker in skin tone, but was a staunch Conservative Republican, that those same “dummies” would never vote for him.
It’s always about politics, and not about gender, race, etc. Gender and race are only used as political attack-weapons by the far-left in order to stifle political opposition. Also, the media could care less about a ‘first Black president’ unless that Black president happens to be a Leftist.
As far as the childish-sounding “Yes We Can” - I’m certain the campaign stole that line from the popular “Bob The Builder” cartoon theme song.
The “Change We Can Believe In” nonsense was a knock off of Clinton calling for “change” during his 1992 campaign.
When you have the ‘media’ in your back pocket, there is no need for originality.
The electorate were hoodwinked by promises of “change” and lofty rhetoric. Obama was and is a made member of the Daley Chicago Machine, and a Saul Alinsky marxist acolyte.
September 23 at 10:33 pm | #1 | Link
Democrats are not fools, they know they must silence their critics, and they will with the help of Repubs and Fox news no doubt. They’ll just call it “campaign finance reform”.