On any given night, viewers are regularly and repeatedly misinformed and distracted. Take Tuesday when US General Martin Dempsey, Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, left Afghanistan and traveled to Iraq where he met with, among others, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and with the US Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq which, RTT reported, "More than 225 U.S. troops, seven Defense Department civilians, 530 security assistance team members and more than 4,000 contracted personnel are currently in the office at the Iraqi government's invitation."
And of course the US has stationed 15,000 US troops in Kuwait. Add in that the Iraqi press was full of reports that al-Maliki and Dempsey discussed not just Syria and weapons but also sending US troops back into Iraq.
So surely this dominated the Tuesday network evening news, right?
Wrong.
The two stories that dominated Tuesday night's news? First, the networks continued their wall-to-wall coverage of idiotic remarks by a man attempting to win a seat in the US Senate -- remarks that had been made three days prior and had already been over-covered by the national press -- over-covered to the point of saturation. Second story dominating the 'news'? Rosie O'Donnell's revelation on Twitter that she'd had a heart attack.
Iraq?
Not mentioned. In fact, Brian Williams (NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams) had Dempsey leaving Afghanistan to return to the United States -- which is worse than silence, it's a mistake.
There were other silences.
Saturday, Arthur Brisbane, public editor for The New York Times, had his farewell column published online, "Success and Risk as The Times Transforms" and he noted that "a kind of political and cultural progressivism -- for lack of a better term -- that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times."
We shuddered thinking of the explosion Bob Somerby will have online later this week over the column. Remembering Somerby's July 24th assault on the first New York Times public editor Daniel Okrent when Okrent asserted that the paper was "a liberal newspaper," we pictured circular talking points and little logic.
Jill Abramson, the executive editor of The New York Times who wrote the takedown on Clarence Thomas with Jane Mayer back in the 90s, insisted to POLITICO on Saturday that Brisbane was incorrect and making "sweeping conclusions." She spoke to the cesspool POLITICO because she knew it's basically a Hollywood gossip column for DC. No one rebuts you, no one facts you, they just type up what you said and pretend they reported.
Abramson's disagreement with Brisbane was similar to one the two had last September when Abramson told the public editor, "And I am pretty scrupulous about when we apply our investigative firepower to politicians that we do not do it in a way that favors one way of thinking or one party over the other."
Real news outlets would be aware of that earlier exchange. They'd also want to ask Jill Abramson about last month's report, by Lizette Alvarez, on strip clubs in Tampa where the GOP convention will be held. It was a smarmy little piece of crap that didn't deserve to be published -- that's before you bring a stripped with an alleged likeness to a famous female politician. Where is the similar report on Charlotte?
Charlotte, North Carolina is where the Democratic National Convention will take place. How well known is Charlotte for its strip joints? In October of 2008, Ron Hart (Yahoo! Contributor Network) reported, "Whether you are in Charlotte, North Caroline for work, for pleasure, or are a native, you will have no shortage of options when it comes to strip joints." He went on to rank the top seven strip clubs in the city. NUDITY WARNING BEFORE NEXT LINK, and The Ultimate Strip Club List notes 16 'happening' strip clubs in Charlotte.
So someone needs to ask Jill Abramson exactly which reporter she's going to have covering strip clubs in Charlotte since she's so scrupulous that the paper never "favors one way of thinking or one party over the other"?
While you hold your breath for that day that's never coming, prepare for Somerby to spend forever and a day ripping Brisbane apart.
Bob Somerby's a media critic. He's often an accurate media critic. Often. Not always. No one is. He also has a set of bias. For example, being friends with Matthew Cooper (formerly of Time magazine) meant that he savaged Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame and repeatedly called Wilson a liar. He never disclosed to his readers that he and Cooper were friends. Cooper, of course, knew that Scooter Libby leaked to the press that Valerie Plame was CIA. Cooper had a lot to hide. We're sure it was just coincidence that led Bob Somerby to attack Plame's husband Joe Wilson as a liar. (Joe Wilson's not a liar. Joe Wilson told the truth. Matthew Cooper is and was a joke.)
Another bias is that he can only aim so high. Unlike many critics, he does go after a few of the high prized voices of the left. A few. But he drops to the floor like a bad can of ravioli when it comes to calling out Barack.
Over and over lately, Somerby has repeatedly called out the lie that Mitt Romney's released tax returns are insufficient when compared to other nominees. Here he is August 15th calling out Debbie Wasserman Schultz for insisting Romney wasn't doing what others had done:
In 2008, Candidate McCain released two years of tax returns. His wife released no full returns, although the family's extensive wealth was contained in her returns. Candidate Palin also released two years of tax returns.
McCain released two years of tax returns. Is there any chance that Wasserman Schultz still didn't know that fact?
Here he is August 17th, calling out TV gadfly Lawrence O'Donnell and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for the same thing:
Surely Reid understands that Candidate McCain released only two years of tax returns, just as Candidate Romney is doing. Candidate Palin also released only two years of returns.
We can go on and on with one link after another where Bob Somerby repeatedly calls out people repeating the lie. But, funny thing, on Monday it got repeated again. On Tuesday there was nothing but silence from Bob Somerby. Strange because Monday, Barack Obama held a White House press conference. Brian Montopoli (CBS News) reported on it and noted that Barack raised Romney's tax returns. From the official White House transcript of that press briefing, here's Barack:
And when it comes to releasing taxes, that's a precedent that was set decades ago, including by Governor Romney's father. And for us to say that it makes sense to release your tax returns, as I did, as John McCain did, as Bill Clinton did, as the two President Bushes did, I don't think is in any way out of bounds.
I think that is what the American people would rightly expect -- is a sense that, particularly when we're going to be having a huge debate about how we reform our tax code and how we pay for the government that we need, I think people want to know that everybody has been playing by the same rules, including people who are seeking the highest office in the land. This is not an entitlement, being President of the United States. This is a privilege. And we've got to put ourselves before the American people to make our case.
Not a word from Bob Somerby on Tuesday. Or Wednesday. Or Thursday. Or Friday. Or Saturday. Again, when it's Barack, he drops to the ground like a bad can of ravioli.
This week, he'll most likely focus on Brisbane as he continues to refuse to call out Barack's lie. We will get no, "Surely Obama understands . . ." It's strange because Chris Hayes got called out by Bob . . . for not repeating the lie. (Lawrence O'Donnell, in one of his many verbal eruptions, repeated it while Chris was his guest and Chris did not correct him. Chris ignored the remark and that led to a finger-wagging from Bob Somerby.)
Bob Somerby is probably one of the MVPs of media criticism but even he will only go so far.
Which is too bad because when a president repeats a lie, it's a lot more important than when some MSNBC desk jockey repeats it. When a president repeats a lie, the stenographers rush to circulate it. Truth tellers should be calling it out.
You have no truth tellers on TV. Each side backs hires that pimp their point of view, not voices that tell truths. The 'news' is a sewer and a public menace.
And truth telling is a dangerous practice. We thought about that last week as we caught Suits (USA Network) and saw Jessica (Gina Torres) fire Harvey's legal secretary Donna (Sarah). Donna's the heart and soul of the firm and you can't imagine how it could exist without her. But last week she still got fired. The whole world is Donna. In charge of a small domain but forever at risk of losing it at any moment. That's true even of Jessica who's battling to make sure Daniel doesn't take over the firm.
It's that risk of losing it all, that risk of leaving what you know for the unknown, that ensures that so many toe the line and keep their mouths shuts and never tell the truth. It makes for an ill-served public and makes for a dying democracy.
