Yesterday the mayhem in the bloggersphere regarding an intentional and inflamatory headline printed by Bloomberg Talking Points Memo, and Huffington Post.
Of course being the headline readers we are, a lot of us didn't bother to look at the actual quote or the transcript.
But I almost can't blame you for your initial reaction. How could you react differently with the headlines or leading lines like what we saw yesterday?
Update: I usually don't post comments in my diaries. But this one jumped out at me.
I swear to God, this issue is like the fucking birth-certificate. No matter how many times he calls Wall St.'s behavior "shameful", "wreckless", "irresponsible", no matter whether he proposes a bank tax to recoup "every dime" of taxpayer money, there will be people who just can't fathom that he doesn't have a secret agenda to reward Wall St., just as there are people who can't fathom that he doesn't have a secret agenda to indoctrinate school children.
When will this fucking madness end?!?
Fou
Update II: A kossack reminded me of whom I forgot, but meant to include. Paul Krugman and his non-factual hyperventilating. More below the fold.
President Obama was interviewed by Bloomberg News on yesterday and he was asked a serious of questions regarding the wall-street bonuses and reckless behavior.
And from that interview we saw headlines and leading lines like this.
Bloomberg News, Julianna Goldman and Ian Katz
Obama Doesn’t ‘Begrudge’ Bonuses for Blankfein, Dimon
Bloomberg News is the media outlet that that started the flames. Not only did he not say this, he never mentioned their names in the actual quote. And notice how the only word quoted is "begrudge"
Huffington Post, Simon Johnson
Where'd The Outrage go? Obama softens tone on Bank Bonuses.
This was changed after they were called out on it. Their first headline read something like Obama doesn't begrudge bank bonuses of CEO. BTW, when you read the actual quotes, ask yourself, where did he soften? I'm sorry he didn't yell and jump up and down in his chair like Tom Cruise at the interviewer Arianna.
Clearly Arianna, and a lot of other so-called liberals are looking for President Obama to be George Bush is democratic drag.
Huffington Post, by Sam Stein
The White House is moving swiftly to stem the fallout from a potentially damaging interview President Obama gave on Tuesday, in which, it was reported, he did not "begrudge" the multibillion-dollar bonuses of Wall Street executives.
Notice, again, the only word (s) in quotation marks is begrudge.
If this leading line were read correctly it would read:
President Obama was quoted as saying begrudge.
But instead Sam Stein and Huffington Post purposefully made this leading line read as President Obama doesn't begrudge Wall-Street bonuses, when President Obama said absolutely NOTHING of that sort.
Talking Points Memo, by Rachel Slajda
Obama: I Don't Begrudge JPMorgan & Goldman CEOs Their Bonuses
Talking Points Memo doesn't even bother to use quotes. They just set it up as if President Obama said every word just like they printed.
Update II Paul Krugman
I’m with Simon Johnson here: how is it possible, at this late date, for Obama to be this clueless?
Well Krugman, you just hung your reputation around the neck of a guy who admits he didn't read the transcripts and that separately the two quotes are true, but admits to trying to meld them together into something sinister. How is it that little ole me has more intelligence than all these highly paid experts?
Paul Krugman = Hyperventilator-in-Chief.
Here is what President Obama actually said President Obama
I, like most of the American people, don't begrudge people success or wealth. That's part of the free market system. I do think that the compensation packages that we've seen over the last decade at least have not matched up always to performance. I think that shareholders oftentimes have not had any significant say in the pay structures for CEOs.”
Where in this does he say he doesn't begrudge Wall Street bonuses or specific CEO profits?
He further goes on to criticize the compensation structure of wall-street executives and offers an idea of how their pay structures should go on to be revamped.
Oh yes Huffington Post and Bloomberg, I can certainly see in those words were he has flip-flopped on Wall-Street or grown soft, NOT!
Let us go further. Yesterday when this story first broke, I was on the Kos arguing with another Kossack on whether or not what the President said was "stupid" This Kossack said well the President saying wall-street executives bonuses were smaller than professional baseball players was stupid.
I did not read the quote at the time of the baseball reference, but since have. And just as I did not read the quote at the time, I can now tell the Kossack critic of the President did not read the quote either.
President Obama was actually in a round-about way, criticizing the national baseball league. He was saying like wall-street, players are not paid based on performance, which in his opinion is just as crazy. Here is the full quote.
“Listen, $17 million is an extraordinary amount of money. Of course, there are some baseball players who are making more than that who don't get to the World Series either. So I'm shocked by that as well. I guess the main principle we want to promote is a simple principle of "say on pay," that shareholders have a chance to actually scrutinize what CEOs are getting paid. And I think that serves as a restraint and helps align performance with pay. The other thing we do think is the more that pay comes in the form of stock that requires proven performance over a certain period of time as opposed to quarterly earnings is a fairer way of measuring CEOs' success and ultimately will make the performance of American businesses better.”
Its really a crying shame when our media (especially so-called liberal media) purposefully twist President Obama's words to fit into their narrative in pursuit of ratings and sales.
Its even more shameful when we, the reading public, fall for it every time.
You all say the President's message doesn't get out, blah blah blah. Well its no damned wonder why when you have media like this as your filter to the American people.
They clearly pick the message they want us to hear, not the message delivered.
This is the sort of irresponsible media tactics that must be called out loudly. Not just by the White House, but by the American people. Have we forgot this is the same media that told the American people there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?
Report for ratings and sales, nevermind facts or the American people.
Look at how Simon Johnson of Huffington Post framed his article yesterday.
Taken separately, these statements are undeniably true. But put them together in the context of the Bloomberg story - we have to wait until Friday for the full text of the interview.
If they are true "separately", then why in the hell are you trying to twist the President words and meld two separate statements into one so you can have something negative to report? Even better of a question, whyTF didn't you wait to actually read the transcripts before trashing President Obama and stoking flames?
That's it America, your media in a nutshell. Fan the flames first, wait on actual quotes and transcripts later.
And its high time we call them out each and every time they do it.
Drop them a note about their shoddy journalism and sensational headlines.
jgoldman6@bloomberg.net
ikatz2@bloomberg.net
mario@huffingtonpost.com
help@talkingpointsmemo.com
IMHO, he's owed an apology.