News of the Dave Weigel/JournoList dustup shouldn’t of surprised many of us. For those hiding under a rock the story begins, and ends, with a Google Group of “Journalists” who had internal discussions about the news of the day….and how best to spin it to make the right seem bad, racist, and all that jazz while making the left look like stellar human beings who are the Country’s saviors. Here is Politico over a year ago:
For the past two years, several hundred left-leaning bloggers, political reporters, magazine writers, policy wonks and academics have talked stories and compared notes in an off-the-record online meeting space called JournoList.
Proof of a vast liberal media conspiracy?
Not at all, says Ezra Klein, the 24-year-old American Prospect blogging wunderkind who formed JournoList in February 2007. “Basically,” he says, “it’s just a list where journalists and policy wonks can discuss issues freely.”
But some of the journalists who participate in the online discussion say — off the record, of course — that it has been a great help in their work. On the record, The New Yorker’s Jeffrey Toobin acknowledged that a Talk of the Town piece — he won’t say which one — got its start in part via a conversation on JournoList. And JLister Eric Alterman, The Nation writer and CUNY professor, said he’s seen discussions that start on the list seep into the world beyond.
That was in March of 2009.
Five days ago Washington Post blogger Dave Weigel, a man supposedly hired to cover the right, was outed by emails from that list, as a Conservative hating dweeb.
Washington Post blogger Dave Weigel resigned today after a host of offensive e-mails surfaced revealing his disdain for much of the right – the beat he was charged with covering. Fishbowl DC, which published a number of those emails yesterday, confirmed the resignation with the Post just after noon.
Yesterday I reported on leaked emails from Weigel to a listserve of liberal journalists bashing conservatives and conservatism – you know, the people Weigel is supposed to be covering. As bad as those email were, a plethora of messages from Weigel published in the Daily Caller take the conservative-bashing to a whole new level.
The new emails also demonstrated that yesterday’s quasi-apology from Weigel was really not as sincere as he claimed. He said that he made some of his most offensive remarks at the end of a bad day. But these new emails show that there was really nothing unique about them, and that offensive remarks about conservatives really were nothing new or uncommon.
But the story isn’t about the dweeb. It’s about the collusion amongst some 400 reporters to spin the news in a certain way.
This is the liberal bias we have been writing about for years, and Andrew Breitbart wants to out it:
I’ve had $100,000 burning in my pocket for the last three months and I’d really like to spend it on a worthy cause. So how about this: in the interests of journalistic transparency, and to offer the American public a unique insight in the workings of the Democrat-Media Complex, I’m offering $100,000 for the full “JournoList” archive, source fully protected. Now there’s an offer somebody can’t refuse.
Yes, the mainstream media that came together to play up the false allegations that the “N-Word” was hurled 15 times by Tea Party participants at the Congressional Black Caucus outside the Capitol the day before the “Obamacare” vote, is the same MSM that colluded to make sure the American public accepted the smear, and refused to show the exculpatory videos that disproved the incendiary charges of Tea Party racism.
Ezra Klein’s “JournoList 400” is the epitome of progressive and liberal collusion that conservatives, Tea Partiers, moderates and many independents have long suspected and feared exists at the heart of contemporary American political journalism. Now that collusion has been exposed when one of the weakest links in that cabal, Dave Weigel, was outed. Weigel was, in all likelihood, exposed because – to whoever the rat was who leaked his emails — he wasn’t liberal enough.
~~~Weigel’s career at the Washington Post was assassinated for his crimes against conformity. Try as he might, as a left-leaning journalist he didn’t conform enough. When conservatives jumped on his exposure, he cited defending me as a mitigating alibi. Defending me publicly is a hangable offense in them thar liberal hills!
But Dave Weigel is not the story. The “JournoList” is the story: who was on it and which positions of journalistic power and authority do they hold? Now that the nature and the scope of the list has been exposed, I think the public has a right to know who shapes the big media narratives and how.
~~~…members of academia and think tanks are actively working to form the narrative used by the press to thwart conservative messages. Like a ventriloquist’s dummy, the reporters on the listserv mimicked the talking points invented and agreed upon by the intellectuals who were invited to the virtual cocktail party that was Klein’s “JournoList.”
And let us not forget the participation of Media Matters in the larger picture of intimidation and mockery for any reporter, like Weigel, who dares stray from the one acceptable liberal narrative in the media. Flying its false flag as a “media watchdog,” the $10 million-or-so per year agitprop command center creates and promotes a system of conformity in which it relentlessly attacks anyone who strays from the Soros-funded party orthodoxy.
Of course liberals like Andrew Sullivan and Charles Johnson are whining about the offer. I mean a grouplist with 400 people on it should expect to be kept private right?
Yeaaaah.
And get this….the man, Andrew Sullivan, who…outed…private…Sarah…Palin emails is complaining that anyone would want this lists content to be outed.
Amazing.
More here.
See author page
Brilliant, just a brilliant article. No I thought that up by myself, no Journolist. If others use it, no need to credit me. But Curt can use the hits.
Say you didn’t suspect this was going on all along? Gravitas anyone?
Great piece Curt, although I bet you won’t find enough libs to agree with a media bias conspiracy to count on more than one hand. I used to find it interesting that libs/progs denied any media bias by anyone other than FOX. I move past that into complete disgust, then grudging acceptance. Now I consider them part of the problem of the media bias. They continue to buy the papers, watch the channels, and review the blogs of these people, hence, they fund the bias, and as such, are part of the problem. The only fight we have against it is places like FA, Mike’s place and other conservative news sources and blogs who point out the inconsistencies and outright lies being told by the msm.
This article simply represents the age-old complaint of the right-wing about ‘the liberal media’. But I challenge the right-wing to show any less bias by ‘conservative media’–and in fact, I would assert that more falsehoods are spread by the latter than the former.
@tadcf…. of course you’d make that assertion… you’re a brain damaged libtard.
@tadcf:
Have any facts to back that up at all or are you just wingin’ it hoping no one would call you out?
Care to talk about the “shouted racial slur” story eagerly spread by the lib media without one shred of evidence…and then the complete lack of retraction or correction when the videos footage of that day didn’t support the meme?
No?
Didn’t think so.
@tadcf
Really? You believe that tripe? I am guessing you watch Ms. Maddow’s show with starry eyes, Olbermann’s show with a man-crush and can’t wait every morning to jump on the computer and lap up the latest HuffPost opinion piece.
Their is a reason why we believe in a left-slanted, intentional media bias. It’s because it is true. Research the party affiliation of any news type, whether belonging to a major market newspaper or associated with NBC/ABC/CBS in some way, and you will notice they are democrats. Is there any wonder they look at the news differently than conservatives? We love facts. Verifiable facts. Unfortunately, the msm does not delve into verifiable facts, and as such, we as a country do not have the watchdogs in the major news media that we should.
AC gave you just one example of a topic with a left wing slant that ran rampant in the news following the supposed incident, later to be found completely false. You don’t call that media bias?
We could list many, many more examples for you, although I believe it would be lost on you just how much the msm is in the tank for the libs/progs.
perhaps the American public is waking up?
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matt-robare/2010/07/01/abcbsnbc-lost-one-million-viewers-last-quarter
As if there were no purposeful collusion, behind-the-scenes discussion, or intentional news slant on the conservative side of the political divide…
@Greg:
Any evidence to support that…or is your post just another presumptuous assumption mixed with moral relativism?
One needs only to watch FOX News’s “fair and balanced” coverage of events with the critical faculty fully engaged to observe that their straight news is selectively presented and framed to reinforce the undeniable slant of their commentary. I’ve also noted the way that politically useful memes and misleading bits of information are injected into the conservative blogosphere to rapidly propagate and multiply, with little critical analysis or little apparent concern for fact at any point along the way. Then there’s the matter of concocted news story centerpieces, such as the videos created by James O’Keefe. Their calculated use and distribution created a powerful false impression on such a grand scale that later revelations concerning editing done to create deliberate inaccuracy became pretty much irrelevant to any subsequent understanding of the truth. I take things like that to be highly suggestive, if not outright evidentiary.
Now Greg, you’ve provided very scant levels of any sort of example as to the collusion you claim is occurring.
The fact that stories hit the airwaves or the Interwebz and then spread in a viral sort of fashion proves what, exactly? Oh, that’s right….nothing.
As far as your accusations of editing go regarding the O’Keefe tapes, well, that’s more than a bit ridiculous since the entire unedited tapes were released as well.
As far as the “false impression” you claim resulted from the tapes…well, you’re gonna be hard pressed to show how the tapes created anything other than a crystal clear demonstration of what was going on in those offices.
@Aye Chihuahua:
Crystal clear to whom? Greg? I think he proved what ‘Crystal Clear’ means in his world. Of all evidences he could have sited, he brought up ACORN. If he presumes the ACORN mess was the result of circumstantial editing and collusion among the right, crystal clear is more than likely crystal murky. There’s nothing you can point out to those deluded koolaid drinkers, in which you will all of a sudden get them to see clearly.
OK, here’s one item of graphic evidence of recent FOX News distortion–a screenshot of a chart that appeared with a couple of televised FOX News stories earlier this week, visually demonstrating the steady increase in unemployment since Obama took office:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201006280019
As the article clearly explains, the chart is an deliberate exercise in distortion; the “fact” that it presumes to illustrate–that there’s been an unchecked rise in the rate of joblessness since Obama took office–isn’t actually a fact at all. Nor is the source of the chart really the Bureau of Labor Statistics as the label implies. That’s probably only where FOX obtained a carefully selected set of data points to play around with.
Is this only a Kool-Aid induced hallucination?
FOX News is no more biased nor distorts anymore than any other news outlet. And what is it’s audience share in comparison to the reach of liberal bias and distortions and cultural influence from news sources, to Hollywood entertainment, to our education system?
No time to rehash, so some cut-and-paste to consider:
Please don’t pretend that liberal bias and distortions in the media are merely figments of conservative imagination ever since Cronkite- the most trusted name in journalism- and the Tet Offensive.
tadcf: it’s that simple for you, and you wont call it treasonus lies?. well arent we lucky to have the conservative blog like this FA to be alert and demote thoses and straighten up thoses lies every time for us, this is what i call where the TRUTH is, and every new commer mention it how happy they are to find this blog, as I did myself. bye 🙄
To Wordsmith:
Somehow I thought that by answering each email that I received, my replies would be automatically posted on this site–but I guess not. I don’t think anyone would deny that most media sources have their own liberal or conservative biases–but the conservative media seem most prominent for their distribution of out-right falsehoods (as Greg has pointed out in two examples regarding this particular session).
prescienceblog.com
GREG: hi, compare to other medias, if there is some details you dont like,it’s minimal, and the others medias dont even bother to put negative news or events for the government except for negative on republicans and they project negative exagerate news on teapartys wich are the peoples views, and put down the image of conservatives when they have a chance, exemple; what they did to SARAH PALIN who has more class then anyone of their females journalist and journolists what ever. bye 🙄
Update, three pages of ugly, look who has no qualms about striking that racist match, couldn’t be members of MSM, or could it? 😯
Alinsky, alive and well, “label them as racist.”
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/20/documents-show-media-plotting-to-kill-stories-about-rev-jeremiah-wright/1/#ixzz0uECzdMDG
Andrew Breitbart:
http://biggovernment.com/abreitbart/2010/07/20/journolist-yes-but-the-reporters-at-pravda-werent-such-insufferable-assholes/
heh.