The Washington Post gets rid of Dan Froomkin. His apparent crime was being well read and not cheering the Iraq War like most of the rest of the Post’s editorial section.
Breaking News
Oprah Quitting TV Show In 2011
“Liberal Media”: No Liberals Allowed
June 18th, 2009
34 Comments
An interesting paragraph buried in the bottom 1/3 of Greenwalds column.
“All of this underscores a critical and oft-overlooked point: what one finds virtually nowhere in the establishment press are those who criticize Obama not in order to advance their tawdry right-wing agenda but because the principles that led them to criticize Bush compel similar criticism of Obama. Rachel Maddow is one of the few prominent media figures who will interview and criticize Democratic politicians “from the Left” ”
Now Greenwald starts talking about the Press and then switches to television and then bundles the 2 as media. He implies that the media is dominated by either those with a right wing agenda or that those who remain are from “the left” and who won’t criticize Democratic politicians. Again the mask slips.
For once I find myself in agreement with the old sock puppet master Glenn Greenwald.
Its like Wingnut Welfare in reverse for liberals like Donahue and Froomkin. It is hard to beleive that in today’s economic climate that a corporate entity like WAPO would let someone as successful as Froomkin walk. I guess money DOESNT talk if you are a successful liberal.
I hope TPM picks him up b/c the man is a tremendous reporter
Liberal media my fucking ass.
AO,
Whatever issues you might have with Greenwald, I find his writing lucid, informative, and backed up by examples. As a former freelancer I ma staggered by the amount of great writing he does on a daily basis.
Funny isn’t it that whatever the “Sockpuppet” accusation refers to, it does not address anything in his daily statements, which stand or fall on their own merits. It apparently refers to some long ago incident, and is used by his critics to avoid addressing current events and Glenn’s clear thinking on them. His passion as a civil rights attorney for the Bill of Rights and all it stands for is refreshing in an age where torture is considered by some to be a legitimate practice.
If right wingers like “Amused Observer” had any integrity they’d be reading Glenn Greenwald daily.
But RIGHT WINGERS DON’T HAVE INTEGRITY.
Whatever conscience conservatives may have possessed as a group was lost over 40 years ago.
What remains of the right wing are serpents, suckers, and fanatics.
I’ll cut the suckers and even the fanatics some slack.
The serpents are scum.
Right winger “Amused Observer” is one of the serpents.
But that’s my conservative conscience speaking.
Again the mask slips.
Logic fail.
Repack,
I find it hard to believe you don’t have any knowledge of Greenwalds embarrassing little moment being outed as he was but that has very little to do with my post. It was uncharitable of me to indulge in a little liberal baiting but it is a guilty pleasure.
I disagree with most of what he writes, his passion for civil rights as you put it is is quite selective. But I find little to disagree with in the column cited. Your mention of torture as in an age where it is considered legitimate seems, well a bit tortured itself and much more irrelevant than my mention of Greenwalds deception. A columnist caught blatantly lying suffers a loss of credibility that is hard to remove. I would venture you brought it up only to do a little baiting yourself.
But you failed to comment on my suggestion that the mask had slipped. Have you an opinion on the paragraph that the bulk of my post revolved around? Or did you mean only to bring Greenwalds tenacity in meeting a deadline and his passion to my attention.
Glenn Greenwald “passion for civil rights” is and has been more traditionally ‘conservative’ and ‘libertarian’ than nearly any right wing writer in decades (except for a small handful of atypical and marginalized right wingers).
Greenwald has been loudly (and consistently) condemning the abuse of government power for years even while the bulk of the right wing has been cheering on a VAST expansion of government power and the right wing has even been cheering on the vast expansion of government abuses.
Right wingers have been cheering on ENLARGING government. Right wingers cheered when government expanded it’s legal powers, right wingers cheered when government eviscerated core constitutional protections, right wingers cheered when government expanded it’s surveillance powers over domestic communications, right wingers cheered when government shredded most of the Bill of Rights, right wingers cheered when government asserted the power to torture not just furriners but torture American Citizens, right wingers cheered when government expanded it’s cloak of secrecy, right wingers cheered on nearly every government abuse and government expansion that Republicans could think of.
And Glenn Greenwald has tenaciously and consistently taken the traditional conservative position of having a smaller, accountable government that was responsive to the citizenry and not dictated to by some tiny cabal of imperial right wing extremists.
And Greenwald has held true to his values and decried when those abusive right wing government policies were supported or continued by purported ‘left wingers’.
LOL,
And he also acknowledges the existence and failure of the liberals in the media to hold Democrats accountable.
Every time Amused Observer begins a post with “LOL” what I hear in the ear of my mind is a nervous, fruity little giggle.
No, AO, you may not change the subject. Not until you’ve eaten your peas.
The important point is that Douthat was the last person on Post editorial who was neither a neo-Con nor a Broderite, and as Greenwald succinctly points out, his firing underscores the hollowness of right-wing whining about liberal media control.
What really bothers the wingnuts is not that liberals control the media but that there are any liberals in media at all.
I think he means that we have a shortage of liberals in the media who criticize Obama when he deserves it rather than when the rightwing echo chamber demands it. Legitimate criticism, like that offered by Froomkin, Greenwald, and Maddow, is much-needed and much-desired. Token criticism in the name of some false sense of “balance”, designed not to inform but rather to quiet the wailing and gnashing-of-teeth from the right, does no one any good. It’s not enough to question and criticize Obama – no, you need to do so in the required manner, over the required subjects, and with the mandatory level of zeal and vitriol – otherwise the corporate media will be displeased.
Wilber what you should be hearing is a hearty chuckle at the foolishness of the left. And isn’t fruity code for fag? That isn’t considered acceptable to demean someone’s choice of sexuality is is?
If you read Greenwald’s column critically you will see that he makes the case for the liberal domination of the media himself. Grenwald states the media is either forwarding a right wing agenda or if they have a liberal viewpoint with the exception of Rachel Maddow they are in the tank for the Democrats.
While you can pick out some media professionals who are typically forwarding a right wing agenda you won’t find a majority if you line them all up side by side. Of the remainder in Greenwalds opinion only Maddow will take the Democrats to task. The mask slips.
What liberals in the media?
CBS’s Katie Couric handed her megaphone over to Republican leader Rush Limbaugh the first week she was in charge of the nightly news.
CBS’s Bob Schieffer cites Republican leader Limbaugh as an authority every chance he can.
NBC’s David Gregory is Republican Karl Rove’s dance partner.
ABC radio ‘news’ even pushes right wing talking points on AirAmerica for Heaven’s sake.
And FOX increasingly pushes the envelope of advocating violent right wing extremism.
CNBC constantly pushes right wing economic fictions.
MSNBC has half of it’s morning show run by an actual far right Republican politician.
ABC fired the closest thing to a libertarian/liberal host (Bill Maher).
Before ‘balancing’ the right wingers that controlled most of it’s air time, MSNBC fired the only liberal it had on (Phil Donahue).
Even PBS and NPR have right wing biases, Republican appointee Kenneth Tomlinson saw to that when he controlled the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
And despite the overwhelming number of hard right wing commentators on nearly every show on TV and a control of 8 out of 9 (9 out of 10?) radio stations by right wingers and even an absurd amount of the print media being controlled by right wingers, right wingers are still pushing the fiction that there is a ‘liberal media’.
It’s nonsense and always has been nonsense.
The only ‘liberal media’ that exists is the occasional fact or piece of scientific evidence that slips through the overwhelmingly conservative corporate media.
How old is the planet? If the ‘media’ says the planet (or the Universe) is over 6,000 years, it’s labeled ‘the liberal media’.
What do you think about evolution. If the ‘media’ describes evolution as having the weight of scientific evidence to support it over other theories, it’s labeled ‘the liberal media’.
And lets not even get started on global warming deniers like right wing fool George Will. But, hey, you can still read him in the right wing WashingtonPost and even watch him on the right wing ABC channel….
The only “liberal media” which truly exists is on the internet ‘blogosphere and is precisely why the corporate media and conservative politicians and pundits work so hard to marginalize and demonize ‘bloggers.
And “Wilbur[1138?]“ gets a double Hero of the Day Award for:
“What really bothers the wingnuts is not that liberals control the media but that there are any liberals in media at all.”
And that’s exactly it. If there is even a single liberal voice for even 20 MINUTES in a 24 HOUR span of time in a media venue, it’s labeled ‘liberal media’ by right wing whiners.
[Greenwald's] passion for civil rights as you put it is is quite selective.
Examples:
Your mention of torture as in an age where it is considered legitimate seems, well a bit tortured itself and much more irrelevant than my mention of Greenwalds deception.
I gave that as an example of how far we have fallen, since we know our government has tortured peoploe, and how much we need voices like Greenwald’s to defend the Bill of Rights. Surely you do not approve of torture, so there should be no argument there.
A columnist caught blatantly lying suffers a loss of credibility that is hard to remove.
Pretty selective of you . By that standard the entire staffs of the NYT and WaPo have no credibility after DailyKos scooped them on the WMD lies. Is that what you mean?
But you failed to comment on my suggestion that the mask had slipped. Have you an opinion on the paragraph that the bulk of my post revolved around?
I’m not sure what you meant, because I couldn’t find any reference in Greenwald’s article to that phrase. Are you disputing that both TV and newspapers are members of the media? Obviously they are. If the WaPo fires their only liberal columnist and keeps a bunch of hacks, it provides more evidence that they are in the tank for the right.
It is no secret that Greenwald is nearly as hard on Obama as he was on Bush, mostly on different issues, but on the same issues when Obama emulates Bush. Greenwald is an equal opportunity civil rights advocate; he goes after liberal politicians as much as conservatives when they abuse our rights.
Wilber what you should be hearing is a hearty chuckle at the foolishness of the left. And isn’t fruity code for fag? That isn’t considered acceptable to demean someone’s choice of sexuality is is?
LOL
Wow. Just when I thought my old home-town paper couldn’t get any worse.
Delude yourselves about the media all you want. You’re not fooling anyone. When Gore was running somebodies mask slipped and he claimed the media support was worth 5 points or so. By the time Bush had 8 years the media wasn’t even trying to hide it anymore as sever liberal commentors mentioned.
When Gore was running somebodies mask slipped and he claimed the media support was worth 5 points or so.
“Somebody?” Does somebody have a name?
So if the media had supported Gore, it would have put him over the top by a 5 point margin? Bush must have REALLY been trailing, since even with massive media help he he lost the popular vote and only won a squeaker by getting lucky in the SCOTUS after the congressional staffers rioted.
I don’t have the guys name but it was a fairly famous quote I’m sure you can google it up if you so desire.
As I said if you think the media isn’t liberal you’re only deluding yourself.
Jesus, what about that Journolist server setup. But it is useless trying to convince you. Your mind is made up. Why bother.
AO doesn’t do credible citations. No sir, you just gotta believe in his inherent truthiness.
“As I said if you think the media isn’t liberal you’re only deluding yourself.”
Judith Miller. No kindly STFU.
Now, even.
LOL Jaim,
Don’t you mean SO kindly shut the fuck up. Your mind slips a few cogs when you don’t have enough interaction with adults. Common complaint of stay at home moms.
What part of “Judith Miller” don’t you understand? The so-called “liberal” press cheer-leaded us into a war on false pretenses.
If anything, the media tends to be pro-corporation above all else since it’s own by, obviously, corporations.
And WaPo getting rid of Froomkin is just another in a long line of signs that the paper became a right-wing rag long ago. The employ neocons like Krauthammer and Kristol for God’s sake. Since when did they pay Michael Moore or Howard Dean to write for them on a regular and on-going basis?
See, wing-nuts you can’t deal with the reality here — the majority of Americans support Obama and hate the GOP. So you go looking for these weird explanations about media mind-control and so on.
Take your Geritol and learn to deal, old man. The 1970’s are over.
(And btw, are you getting paid to troll this site these days? I notice you’re on pretty much 24/7. Get your rest, gramps. Go catch Matlock and take a little nappy-poo before you get a heart-attack.)
Relax Jaim,
Your concern for my health is probably a little less than sincere. Your grammer slips when you’re rattled. You can claim anything you want, it’s not like you are open to reason. If you want to think that the media isn’t biased towards the left go ahead. Operating from a false sense of perspective doesn’t make you or your movement more effective. BTW I can slam a few lines towards Ollieland anytime I want unless I’m actually out in the field. Even then I could but I’m not really a thumbtexting sort of guy.
“Operating from a false sense of perspective doesn’t make you or your movement more effective.”
I’m quite happy with how we did in 2006 and 2008, and will most likely do in 2010 and 2012 while you babble on and wet yourself over the LIBRUL MEDIA OMG as Kristol, Krauthammer, and many other neocons and wing-nuts continue to get columns published in places like The New York Times and The Washington Post. Not just published as guests, but as regularly paid op-ed writers.
Don’t wear those dentures down too much with your teeth-gnashing.
As for Froomkin, it would kind of funny if he got picked up by the NYT. Trading Froomkin for Kristol, sort of? We know who’ll get the better end of that deal. I think he’d do alright blogging independently, but it’d be nice for him to continue to have the same press credentials/access as before.
AO, it was Evan Thomas of Newsweek (during *Kerry’s* run) who said media bias was worth about 10 points.
I also find it amusing that David Gregory having a little fun AT A PARTY automatically disqualified him forever as a credible journalist, but Greenwald’s “on the job” wholesale creation of different identities, each used in support of the other in order to validate whatever point he was making, is just a triffling incident that should now be forgotten.
I’m starting to think NewsReference may be somehow biologically related to Mr. Greenwald. He rarely stays on point, pushing whatever story he wants to talk about instead of the topic at hand, handles criticism poorly, and (most importantly) takes 15,000 words to say what could be said in 50.
If right wing extremist “Amused Observer” is getting paid by someone to troll this site I wouldn’t think they are getting their money’s worth.
As a representative of the right wing, “Amused Observer” has alternately expressed sympathy for terrorists (literally), defended blatant racism (literally), and defended misogyny and various other bigoted and hateful attitudes.
Right winger “Amused Observer” also repeatedly illustrates the right wing’s unfortunate reliance on deceit and duplicity as the right wing’s central argumentation technique.
The right wing, and especially the Republican Party, doesn’t seem helped by being represented by vicious, dishonest, hateful people that support terrorism.
But perhaps I’m wrong. The right wing Ku Klux Klan movement was remarkably powerful in the 1930’s. Even now a sitting Republican Senator is noted to have been a fan of the KKK and Republican Party members can’t seem to go a week without saying or doing something shockingly bigoted.
Perhaps that’s the right wingers complaints about the mainstream media: That the media isn’t vicious, dishonest, and hateful enough.
Those characteristics certainly typify the extreme right’s preferred media corporation: Rupert Murdoch and his FOX Republican channel.
Murdoch’s FOX Republican channel is not only vicious, dishonest, and hateful, it’s also gone beyond it’s regular tactic of using fear as a political weapon and is increasingly pushing the envelope of encouraging terrorism.
Considering how many corporations pay Murdoch to advertise, perhaps Murdoch’s promotion of terrorism has it’s own sick capitalist logic.
Terrorism sells, and whatever sells, right wingers support.
Vicious circle.
heh, you were saved from my 15,000 word reply, “SaveFarris”, it tripped up the filter and didn’t post (again).
lol
Thanks Farris,
Missed it by 5 points and 4 years.
More proof that corporate America controls the media and corporate America couldn’t possibly creat an industry that didn’t favor corporate America.
Did you know that Dick Cheney and his buddies at Halliburton secretly control the media. They used thier power to spread lies about the Iraquis and cheerleadered us into the war so they could engage in obscene war profiteering.
If only GM had put more effort into thier corporate newsletter we wouldn’t be in the sorry condition we are today.
Again? Oh my God… you mean the stuff you put out NR is only the stuff that makes it through the filter? You try to put MORE spam out there?
Thank you Mr. Willis for putting a limit on comment length.
“More proof that corporate America controls the media and corporate America couldn’t possibly creat an industry that didn’t favor corporate America.”
Back up there, old man. First you said it was libs who run the media, now you say it’s corporate America? The majority of CEO’s are Republican. Not that anyone expects logic from you, but just wanted to point out that you’re flinging bullshit yet again.
The American media is indeed “pro-corporate,” or better yet pro-profit. This clearly makes it align with the GOP on most issues, the GOP being very much the party of corporate control. It doesn’t play out that way all the time, just most of the time. Olbermann gets to keep his job because he gets decent ratings. Smart journalists like Froomkin get fired because his truth-telling (both before and during Obama) was a little too much for his Conservative masters at The Washington Post.
Jaim,
Thanks for the tip on flinging bullshit.
Study up on a concept called sarcasm. That post was directed to someone who “got” it not you. There is another term you could look up, “pulling your leg”.
Did you notice the flights of fancy about Halliburton and GM? You are such a tool.
Talking about Republican Dick Cheney’s war profiteering corp Halliburton in a thread about “liberal media” reminds me of how often Republican Dick Cheney’s favorite media “tool”, Tim Russert helped lies US into the Republican’s Iraq War.
Republican Dick Cheney knew that he could ‘control the message’ through corporate GE/NBC stenographer Tim Russert.
And corporate GE replaced Republican Dick Cheney’s mouthpiece with Republican Karl Rove’s dance partner.
Conservative corporate media controls the majority of media communications in America and always has.