Skip to main content

This. And then this.

They even called it "schedulegate." Analysis and rage below the fold.

This op-ed has been crossposted at my blog, Adaptive Expectations.

On Thursday, the editors of the New York Times penned a widely-circulated piece on the most overblown political conflict in recent memory. Titled “Oh, Grow Up,” the editorial berated Congressional Republicans for asking President Obama put off his planned address on jobs and the economy to a joint session of Congress for one day. The editors closed by expressing their disappointment that “the vital importance of the speech…was upstaged by yet another Washington soap opera.”

There were many things wrong with this editorial, not the least of which was the fact that it offered unenlightened commentary on a total non-issue. To briefly recap: the president sought to address Congress the night it was scheduled to return from vacation, which is also the night of a planned Republican presidential debate. Republican House leader John Boehner requested the speech be delayed one evening, citing previously-scheduled votes on utterly irrelevant issues, but likely more conscious of the Republican debate. Ultimately, the White House – perhaps apologetic, perhaps aware that its potential bluff to divert coverage from the Republican debate had been called – agreed to delay the speech one night. Nonetheless, most of the nation’s leading media outlets, the New York Times included, spun the unremarkable story to page one – displacing stories on the largest protest in Israeli history, a massive WikiLeaks release, and large-scale human rights violations in Syria.

The two-page, 1,300-word article itself that the Times ran on the kerfuffle required the collaboration of four journalists. The article further reported that “[t]he fracas also had the potential to rattle already jittery markets,” a suggestion which, if true, would have been the nail in the coffin of the idea that markets are efficient, and if false - which, judging by the Dow during that period, seems to be the case - would have demonstrated the utter inability of the journalistic establishment to comprehend its subjects.

But more shameful than the news article was the editorial. At points, it read like self-parody: while indignant that “Washington is a sandbox full of petulant children,” in the words of former Clinton official David Rothkopf, the editors twice brushed off explanations for the scheduling mishap with the childish response of “so what?” in order to continue its meaningless crusade. The editorial’s authors contributed to the very “Washington soap opera” that they so self-righteously condemned.

At other points, it simply came across as out-of-touch and moralizing. Remarking that “a presidential address on jobs…certainly trumps one of 20 planned debates among the contenders for the Republican nomination,” the editors seem to be unable to square themselves with tepidity of the President’s rhetoric. As Democratic strategist James Carville noted, given the choice between Obama and a barnstorming Rick Perry, “I would have watched the [Republican] debate, and I’m not even a Republican.”

It comes as no surprise to any of my more frequent readers that I like the New York Times, appreciate its diverse and extensive news coverage, and generally concur with its editorial opinions. It’s cringeworthy low points like these, however, that make one concerned about the lack of depth and clearheadedness of American media. As Salon columnist Glenn Greenwald noted of the episode, to read the New York Times‘ coverage of the non-affair, and to see the waste to which the First Amendment is being put, is “to hear ‘imperial collapse’ like few other things convey.”

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    salmo, esquimaux

    Like what you read? Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/NewshamJ

    by JackinStL on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 10:10:48 AM PDT

  •  This was the newspaper (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    esquimaux

    that recently claimed that Huntsman is one of the four leading Republican Presidential candidates.

    No wonder people do not treat the main stream media seriously.

    We can have change for the better.

    by phillies on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 10:35:39 AM PDT

  •  Increasingly common WTF moments (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    esquimaux

    How to explain an elite consensus so disconnected that we routinely wonder what they could be thinking?  It isn't just the sociopathic aspects, our elites cling to failed neo-liberal economic theories, obsess about non-problems and ignore real ones, and otherwise routinely confirm their unwillingness to lead the nation out of its worst economy in 70 years.  Focusing on this latest kerfuffle fits the pattern.  The economic failure of this once great newspaper is the information seeking public's verdict.  The important question is, What replaces the Times, when it finally succumbs?

  •  word was the time he requested would interfere (0+ / 0-)

    with Congress' ability to watch the Kardashian wedding reruns for those who did not get an invitation

  •  "I disagree strongly with your irrelevant opinion! (0+ / 0-)

    "...

    Getting a bit of that "hey, you kids!" vibe here.

    I mean, I could be wrong, but does paying attention to a meaningless opinion piece about what you claim is a non-story count as trying to lead a dead horse to water and then beating it when it doesn't drink?

    Personally, I like to stick to criticising the media when they screw up about something important.  They probably could have run the Israel story instead, true, but then most Americans wouldn't have even picked up the paper.  Hell, I'm surprised human rights violations in Syria wasn't in the "Lifestyle" section.

    "If we don't change direction soon, we'll end up where we're going." - Professor Irwin Corey (1914 - )

    by CaelanAegana on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 12:28:19 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site