Breaking News
Comcast Close To Buying NBC

Washington Post’s Paul Kane Explains Why Newspapers Should Die

April 9th, 2009 13 Comments

Paul Kane of the Washington Post believes that is his job as a reporter to just write down stuff people say without investigating it. That, of course, is the mindset that Judith Miller of the New York Times worked with that ended up getting thousands of people killed.

Die, newspapers, die. You can’t slump off into oblivion fast enough with your outdated way of thinking.

Posted in Media |
« This Is It: They’re Coming For Our Precious Bodily Fluids!
Joe McCarthy’s Party Is Alive »
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

13 Responses to “Washington Post’s Paul Kane Explains Why Newspapers Should Die”

  1. Bruce says:
    April 9, 2009 at 7:31 pm

    There are some good diaries up at DKos right now about the arrogant whining and stupidity of the newspaper industry.

  2. White Whale says:
    April 9, 2009 at 7:37 pm

    Dude, where is my stenographer?!

    In my worst Chevy Chase impression:
    It was my understanding…that they would be no math…

  3. ed says:
    April 9, 2009 at 7:47 pm

    So why was Richard Cohen so upset with Steven Colbert’s speech at the White House Correspondents Dinner?

  4. Sean D. Martin says:
    April 9, 2009 at 8:04 pm

    Don’t equate poor journalism with newspapers. Yeah, newspaper reporters have done a piss poor job, on the whole, doing their jobs for quite some time. But when newspapers disappear (because their business model no longer works in a changed world) crappy “journalism” will still be around.

  5. blackink says:
    April 9, 2009 at 8:22 pm

    Oliver, I think you’ve been doing a great job over here. Doing the Lord’s work, so to speak.

    But please, please, please don’t make the mistake of thinking all journalists are the same. We don’t all work for the Washington Post, cover the Pentagon or share gossip over martinis with Jake Tapper.

    Many of us cover local zoning board meetings, are among the first ones at the scene of horrific crimes, and actually bother with doing a thorough job of verifying the information given to us by sources.

    What Paul Kane said was piss-poor, yes. But don’t think he represents me or all newspapers journalists anymore than you’d want me to simply lump you in with all bloggers.

    I’ve seen a lot of good, hard-working newspaper people lose their jobs in the past few months. Same as autoworkers, or teachers or cops. You don’t have to sympathize but it’s just not cool to root for people to join the ranks of the unemployed.

  6. bikelib says:
    April 9, 2009 at 8:39 pm

    I always thought that journalism was, “Side A says one thing about a particular issue. Side B says another thing. However, Our REPORTING shows that side B is full of shit”. Silly me, I guess nowadays, they just skip the third step….

  7. Parthenon says:
    April 9, 2009 at 9:15 pm

    To paraphrase Mos Def, they should believe in bigfoot before taking anything a politician says at face value. Sad state of affairs.

  8. jr says:
    April 9, 2009 at 10:13 pm

    these journatards are addicted to access, dinner parties and off the record “scoops”

  9. icruise says:
    April 10, 2009 at 2:53 am

    I’ll admit I don’t read any non-online newspapers, but if I had to say what medium involves more of “just writing down stuff people say without investigating it” I would say blogging. There are good bloggers and bad bloggers, but a huge amount of what bloggers do involves just linking to or riffing on what other people have said, and I can’t tell you how many times I’ve caught blogs believing in and perpetuating false stories.

  10. steve m says:
    April 10, 2009 at 7:40 am

    this story is about as good an example of what’s wrong with the media in this country as you’re likely to find.
    how this guy can be so stupid is mystifying. he’s talking to a fucking republican! they ran roughshod over the democrats while they were in charge! he has an obligation to research a statement like that. his douche-y response is an embarrassment. on some level, i’d hazard a guess that he knows he’s wrong and, like most people just can’t admit it. unlike most people, his job makes it important that he be able to admit to mistakes and correct them, not ignore and compound those mistakes by committing them over and over again.

  11. Dude in Jersey says:
    April 10, 2009 at 2:27 pm

    Judy Miller differs from Kane in that she had a political agenda: helping to grease our way into a war with Iraq. Kane is simply doing his job as a PR flack for the powerful.

  12. News Reference says:
    April 10, 2009 at 4:12 pm

    To riff of of OW:

    “Washington Post’s Paul Kane Explains Why” Paul Kane and his stenographer friends shouldn’t be employed by any news paper or news organization that wants to retain it’s credibility.

    The problem has never been the news “paper,” it’s an ownership problem, it’s a management problem, and it’s an institutional corporate culture problem.

    Once good news papers are wiped out, then the only ones left will be the right wing billionaire propaganda news papers that reportedly lose millions but which are both an indirect political contribution to the Republican Party and a tool to influence those right wing politicians.

    Kane’s response sounds like a love letter / job application to the Republican Politico.com owner (which last I read was still losing money).

    Last I read the money losing right wing newspapers included:

    Murdoch’s New York Post
    Mooney’s Washington Times
    Scaife’s publications (one is a paper in Pennsylvania)

    Also, how is Zell doing ever since he piled debt onto the Tribune Corp? (Chicago Tribune and LATimes)

    And does Murdoch’s Weekly Standard actually make money?

    By capitalism’s standards those publications are failures.

    But it’s wingnut welfare: a combination of political donations to the Republican Party (each publication is essentially a free Republican Party advertisemeht) and a tools to keep those right wing politicians obedient.

    A lot of people are missing the bigger picture of what’s going on.

    To riff off a Colbert line this last week: if news “papers” go down the right wing is rubbing it’s hands expecting there will be a “Golden Age of Corruption.”

  13. Soapy says:
    April 19, 2009 at 3:01 pm

    I agree! What would have happened if the journalists of Watergate fame had simply written down any soundbyte that was thrown their way and hadn’t investigated, dug and exposed the truth?

    Is it merely down to lazy journalists or is it the top-down culture of pre-prepared briefings and statements that only need a tweak of the headline before they make it to front page?