Unbelievable.
Both Huffington Post and Politico are running stories right now about how the MSM is a bunch of whiny babies.
Clearly, that in and of itself is not news. But now, apparently, they are "mad as hell and aren't going to take it anymore!"
What, pray tell, could have the Fourth Estate is such a tizzy?
Why, Barack Obama, of course!
So, we all heard about how the press was pissed that Obama & HRC basically used the Underground Railroad to get to Feinstein's house the week he locked up the nomination. (Gee, I wonder why!)
And apparently last night, there was a pool reporter / pool house incident in which a beleaguered journalist was not kowtowed to in a matter to which she felt accustomed.
Well, the press has had enough, and that was even before the The Great PoolHouse Banishment of 2008.
According to both reports above, on June 6th, the Washington bureau chiefs of six leading news organizations sent a letter to David Plouffe and Robert Gibbs at the Obama campaign, complaining about access and about being deceived by campaign aides. The signatories include AP's Ron Fournier and the late Tim Russert.
The letter reads in part:
"The decision to mislead reporters is a troubling one. We hope this does not presage a relationship with the Obama campaign that is not based on a mutual respect for the truth. Our joint mission is to cover the candidate on behalf of our millions of worldwide viewers and readers. Those individuals expect truthful and fair coverage from us. Your campaign expects nothing short of that from us as well. Surely we should expect the same from you. We sincerely hope we can expect a relationship based on mutual trust in the coming months of coverage."
(emphasis mine to highlight the gut-busting lack of irony in that sentence.)
And here's my favorite part:
"We do not commit to fly on charters to fly with press aides; we make that commitment to fly with the candidate. Each of our organizations is reviewing whether we will reimburse the campaign for last night's flight."
(emphasis mine to highlight the nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah-ishness of that last sentence.)
You know what, MSM? Speaking as one of the 1.5 million shareholders in the Obama campaign? You go ahead and keep your money. In fact, take your money shove it... deep into your pockets. 'Cuz I guaran-fricking-tee you: we can get by without it.
In all seriousness, the unmitigated gall of the media in this instance is breathtaking. Yes, they do have a right to travel with the candidate. And yes, in theory, that is supposed to be for our benefit.
But a show of hands, please, from those who truly consider the MSM to have our best interests at heart. (You know, as opposed to the bottom line.) Do lets hear from those among us who truly believe that the MSM's whole "goddamn ray-son detra" (to quote Raising Arizona) is to provide us, their gentle readers and viewers, with "truthful and fair coverage."
(and........... crickets.)
If they were actually capable of providing that sort of coverage, then I would be much more inclined to support their position on this. And Jason Linkins does make one good point in the HuffPo write up:
"But an affable relationship with the press has its advantages - witness how the press continually presents John McCain as some sort of town hall oratorical genius, when in reality, he's extraordinarily gaffe prone in that format. Going forward, Obama's ability to find a happy medium with the press might be a make-or-break concern."
But after PreacherGate, BitterGate, FlagPinGate, ArgulaGate, BowlingGate, OrganeJuiceGate, AyersGate, and all the rest of the shit they've spewed this season... well, my lack of sympahty for their plight isn't exactly Breaking News.
And as far as Obama not kissing their asses like McCain does possibly being "a make-or-break concern" as Linkins says?
I trust Obama's judgment and I'll take my chances.