Skip to main content

View Diary: Holy Fact Check, Batman! McClatchy Drops a Bomb (198 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The context that changed (13+ / 0-)

    is that the war turned out to be a catastrophuck.  

    It doesn't matter how brazen the lies given to sell the war, how outrageous the war profiteering, etc etc.  In the end, the public would haved cheered a military victory, because that's what everyone wanted:  A reason to feel again powerful after 9/11.

    And the only reason the public turned against the war was that Bush lost it.  

    And hey, politicians and journalists alike want to be right.  Whatever they did or did not really believe about WMD, etc., most did think this would be a cakewalk, we'd be greeted as liberators.  Which would mean the public would cream its pants in support of the war, which would mean that any one opposing it would be roundly derided when glorious victory came.

    That's why everyone who should have known better enabled the war machine, and that's what-all changed between then and now.

    •  Sadly (6+ / 0-)

      I completely agree with you. The media would've kept right on with the administration BS if that'd been what was popular. Just like now, they're shifting away from the administration BS because it's now popular again to "question authority". I don't have any faith that it wouldn't happen again in a heartbeat -- Americans want certain storylines at certain times, and they're the ones who buy newspapers.

      I'm not speaking to particular journalists, who have their own sense of ethics, but to the media as a whole in crafting the narrative that they have to work within.

      •  Following the pack (33+ / 0-)

        Actually the Washington Bureau (then Knight RIdder's) never followed the administration's line.
        If you scroll down to the bottom, you'll find out coverage on Iraq which starts in late 2001.

        http://www.realcities.com/...

        Our reporting hasn't always been printed in many papers, but we continue to pursue the truth. Or at least clarity.

        •  And good job to you (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          azale, TomP

          I hope a major shift is going on, and that you guys will get some recognition for keeping at it. Because you're right, you guys have done a pretty damned good job in a horrible environment. It's amazing how much that can be drowned out when it goes against the story that america wants to hear, and that therefore many of the major outlets want to provide.

        •  Hat tip (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          peraspera, zinger99, ksingh

          Whatever your role in that organization may be, thanks.  I've read some strong stories that sounded amazingly like the truth from Knight-Ridder, and I'm glad McClatchy is keeping it up.

          We desperately need the Fourth Estate to do its job in proctecting democracy.  

        •  Kudos to McClatchy (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          peraspera, jfdunphy, majcmb1, zinger99

          What we want, in the words of Joe Friday, is "just the facts, ma'am."  If the rest of the mass media had maintained the standards that K-R/McClatchy have, there'd be far less criticism of the "MSM".  In fact, it may have taken much longer for the blogosphere to explode, as a great number of us first came to the blogs searching in disgust for something other than the infotainment and spin so dominant in other media.

        •  I'll buy your newspapers... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AlanF, paj1

          (I currently don't subscribe to a hard copy newspaper) if you'll keep up with the good, solid journalism.

          Thanks, McClatchy.

        •  Expansion (0+ / 0-)

          Any interest in buying or starting a newspaper in a suburb of 300,000 people? All we have here is a right-wing rag. Some real journalism would be welcome.

          •  No no no no (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Budlawman

            I want her to buy the Santa Barbara News-Press, whose owner is nuts and is driving the newspaper into the ground (editorial staff walk outs, then lock outs, then union busting, then putting a stupid fence around the whole property to keep former editorial staff out, then serving legal papers on former editorial staff members who dare to write about it in other venues. Seriously, there's a whole book in how NOT to run a quality newspaper in just the past six months of News-Press travails.)

            Bet you could get it cheap too, since all the advertisers are bailing as well.

            Please, Tish? Pretty please? I volunteer to be put in charge!

            •  Funny (0+ / 0-)

              Our rag is called News-Press as well. Not unionized, though. A couple of decent reporters but their work gets quashed by the editor if it puts Dems in a positive light.

              •  Well, ours is not union either (0+ / 0-)

                That's the problem. First, staff quit because publisher was telling news room what to write (or rather, what NOT to write). So remaining staff decided to unionize with -- get this -- the Teamsters. Go figure.

                Anyway, then a lockdown started. Then the fence. Then the injunctions flying all around town. What a freaking mess.

                The whole matter's been referred to the NLRB, which I think already issued something against the publisher (which is odd, NLRB under Bush usually favors owners), but there's some sort of appeals process going on.

                •  It has indeed been a nightmare, Susan (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  azale

                  I am the labor lawyer representing the Teamsters, who won an election, 33-6, on September 27.  The News-Press has been fighting it ever since, and the NLRB just held a hearing to consider the employer's objections.  We are optimistic about the outcome, which should be known within a month.  Here is a NYT story about some of the latest.  The NLRB has decided to prosecute the News-Press for committing certain unfair labor practices, including firing a veteran reporter, cancelling another reporter's column, and threatening a dozen reporters for daring to gather together to circulate and deliver a letter to McCaw demanding changes in managerial behavior.  I wrote a  Diary about this on September 12, and the News-Press actually submitted it as evidence in the hearing!  Sorry, but a lot of the links probably don't work anymore.

                  About the fence, I think management put it up -- in apparent violation of City law -- to shield passersby and motorists who might otherwise have seen "McCaw, Obey the Law" signs in employee car windows.  The City ordered the News-Press to take the fence down, and it complied.  Just last week, management demanded that employees take their signs down, and take off buttons with the same slogan.  The Union filed an unfair labor practice charge against the News-Press for that.

                  I'd be happy to fill you in on the latest, and wanted to recommend an article called "Santa Barbara Smackdown", published by American Journalism Review, authored by Susan Paterno -- who the News-Press has sued for her trouble -- but my search for the link to the online article failed to gain access to it.  McCaw keeps saying there's no way she'll sell the paper, but the Union does hope for and expect a favorable ruling from the judge, which would be another step toward getting to the bargaining table with her.

                  "The true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love."

                  by Budlawman on Sun Jan 14, 2007 at 09:17:05 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Way above my pay grade.. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              AlanF, azale

              You'll have to ask Gary Pruitt, the CEO, at McClatchy Corporate.  

              Or Howard Weaver, the VP, News. http://www.mcclatchy.com/...

    •  yes exactly right (0+ / 0-)

      if this had looked anything like close to being a win no one would want to listen, regardless of what is reported. by no one i mean the vast majority of americans. what has changed is NOT their thinking process, only that we are clearly losing and they dont like that. however we have not yet become a reality based country. be very careful of these republicans that now claim to see the light. no such thing is true. they are simply angry that they are losing, both in iraq and political situation at home. in fact i dont think they care if they lose the war, as long as they retain ownership of the levers of power...

      life is not a dress rehearsal My record label: www.11mileswestofnowhere.com

      by johnfire on Mon Jan 15, 2007 at 12:06:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site