Is it any surprise that MSM is going over-bored on VaTech? Sure, it was a disaster. Yes, it was horrific, and research and real journalism would serve the nation's (and the victims' families') interest. Yes, it is a newsworthy  story. Of course we all here regret it deeply.

But, already the story is being anna nicole'd. Stale experts, pseudoexperts, almost witnesses, even third cousins' spouses, twice removed, who exchanged greetings with a friend of the roommate of a person who almost moved in with one of the victims is being seriously interviewed as a knowledgeble person with a story to tell.

Yet, more than 220 people died in Baghdad. 7 US troops died the last two days. more than 65 died this month, or about 2x the rate at VaTech.

One of the problems with this coverage (there are several), is that it sucks the air out of other, more important news stories.

  • Al Sadr's rejection of the Iraqi Parliament's legitimacy is an omen that cannot be overstated or overestimated.  Democracy (as the boy king calls it) is at an end there, no matter how our administration tries to spin it. Yet, Dana Perino will smirk her Dentyne smirk, and blithely state (without objection or questioning) that this is a perfect example of a working democracy, growth, process and ultimately success. Actually, if she left it at suck, that last word would be more accurate.

Yet, the MSM covered it as though it were a box score for a baseball game.

-In March, there was a horrific shooting in an Indian tribe in Minnesota. Being brown skinned, original Americans, the Bush White House said nothing about it. Then again, the MSM also ignored it, more often than not.

  • Last weekend, the deadliest series of days for our troops have made 2007 the deadliest year on record. Not only is the surge not working, it has clearly become counter-productive.  But is the MSM examining this? NO, to the contrary, THEY lazily play politics, grabbing a Democrat talking head, followed up by  GOP talking head, followed up by an Administration press corpse talking head. Where is the deep investigation? the research? the interviews with people who really know something other than the pertinent talking points?

-Which is more important? Hearing the latest  idiocy from John McCain, or learning about the real nature of Iraq's current collapse into total chaos? Well, which is easier? McCain. Which is preordained by the corporate owners? McCain. Who still has millions in his campaign war chest? McCain. And between the two issues, which it utterly useless, unimportant and simply a waste of time, given the amount of airtime and print given to it? McCain.

  • We learned that France warned the CIA before 9/11, and our MSM makes it seem as though they knew of the attacks, but did nothing. You have to carefully parse the articles to find out what really happened.

This is not journalism. This is convenient, lazy, sensationalism playing make-believe. The examples are many. David Gregory earned a small following simply because (Oh MY) he had an excess spurt of testosterone and followed up a bullshit Snoflake answer with a direct question. This small step of pseudo-independence caused such a tremor within the press corpse that something had to be done. And it was. He was promoted to handle the Imus time slot, earning his wings, and returning to mindless, blathering bimbo watches or over-exposing a regional tragedy like VaTech.

Unfortunately, there seems to be little hope that things will improve soon.

So, which best describes the current MSM of our day?

Originally posted to agnostic on Wed Apr 18, 2007 at 08:55 AM PDT.


Which best describes today's MSM?

37%19 votes
15%8 votes
23%12 votes
15%8 votes
3%2 votes
0%0 votes
3%2 votes
0%0 votes

| 51 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.