Quote:
Originally posted by Gattigap
How about WSJ Op-Ed?
Powerline?
NRO?
|
I differentiate between
(A.) lying sacks of scum who come to me claiming to be neutral, claiming to be bringing me clean, complete, vetted snippets of fact that they have ferreted out of the world, but who, instead, have decided on their own which position is correct and so present me instead with either packets of fackets that are incomplete, and, coincidently, are incomplete specifically in that they lack those facts that fail to support, or actively refute, their own favored positions, or who tell me that things that are really their own "analyses" of facts they aren't bothering to share are really the facts themselves; and
(B). advocates who come to me openly listing their biases and hopes and fears and dreams, and make no bones that what they will be sharing with me are things that support their views.
MSM is (A). Kos, Josh, NRO, Powerline, Corner, Atrios - those are all (B)'s. Yes, they are biased. But they don't pretend to NOT be biased, in hopes of fooling me into buying their schtick. When the NYT presents ten articles in a row about unrest in Iraq, and voting complications, and takes a "poll" of six disaffected Iraqis who want us out, and then end their Iraq coverage there, while all the time telling me "we're giving you all the news!", they become lying scum. When kos does the same thing, while telling me explicitly that he's a Dem fanatic, he's being an advocate. I can respect him, and his role. The NYT, though, is whoring.
