Journalism is Dead

[mandym]

.............."Peaceful.” That’s what they called them. What if a protesting block of humanity were to appear in front of an abortion clinic? Would that be “peaceful”? You know the truth. The media would report that as a violation of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. “Physical obstruction,” even if it’s “peaceful,” is illegal in that location. Put it on a campus, have it organized by leftist anarchists, and it’s somehow a socialist Shangri-La.

What’s remarkable in all this Occupy media mythology is the way these same networks have shamelessly ignored murders, rapes, and mysterious dead bodies in those tents at Occupy protests around the country. They’ll make a national story out of a row of protesters being pepper-sprayed on one California campus, but ignore rapes, beatings, and deaths in other American cities.

This proves again that our TV news stars are not journalists. They are publicists. They don’t report “news.” They supply badly disguised advertising campaigns for the causes they endorse........

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-...ll-column-pouncing-pepper-spray#ixzz1ehVXPY6w

 

[Walguy]

It's undeniably true to any remotely objective observer that the MSM are no longer true journalists, but have become propaganda ministers for the Democrat party. The once proud 'free press' has willingly sold itself into slavery to liberalism. The silver lining is that more and more people are realizing this, and getting their information elsewhere. Which explains why Fox's 3AM (ET) show Red-Eye is now getting more viewers than the highest rated prime-time programming on CNN.

 

[Crabtownboy]

In the OP is stated:

What if a protesting block of humanity were to appear in front of an abortion clinic? Would that be “peaceful”? You know the truth. The media would report that as a violation of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. “Physical obstruction,” even if it’s “peaceful,” is illegal in that location. Put it on a campus, have it organized by leftist anarchists, and it’s somehow a socialist Shangri-La.

As far as this quote goes it is poor writing and illogical. Why? Glad you asked.

1. The comparison is misleading or just wrong. Why? Because the comparison is very strange. It does not say what the "leftist anarchists are protesting. So there is no way to know if this is correct or not. I doubt there is an abortion clinic on the campus, so they would be blocking nothing.

2. The first group if violating a law. Whether you or I believe the law is correct or not isn't the issue. The law is there until it is changed or declared unconstitutional. So that group is violating a law.

If the leftist group were violating a law that would make their activity illegal. But the OP does not say this. It simply paints with a large paint brush with no way to really know what the writer is really saying.

The OP is very poor journalism.

 

[Mexdeaf]

Perhaps reading the entire article would clear up some of those concerns.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Perhaps reading the entire article would clear up some of those concerns.

Actually I did read the entire piece and I see no more merit in his writings than in the defense of the protesters.

 

[exscentric]

"It does not say what the "leftist anarchists are protesting."

Anyone listening to the interviews with these folks will find this as one of the main themes - tear down capitalism and to do that you will probably have to tear down the government. Most understand this as a given of the movement.

 

[preachinjesus]

It is true that most of our journalist based publications have become more tabloid driven than information driven.

One point that is important to note that anyone thinking FoxNews is either a shining example of good journalism or actually, as they purport, "fair and balanced" is asking to be deceived.

Some of the best journalism these days is outside the mainstream in fringe publications and journal type publications.

 

[billwald]

>It is true that most of our journalist based publications have become more tabloid driven than information driven.

AND TV! 90% of TV "news" is gossip. Even NPR and public TV is now more gossip than news.

For the first time in 50 years I've quit having a newspaper delivered. I can scan the headlines on line in 30 seconds and most isn't worth reading the stories. The worst part is that the "reporters" mostly copy official statements from governments and businesses and very seldom ask obvious questions so all we get is propaganda.

If the presidential "debates" are an example of what Americans want - most want entertainment, not news or intelligent debate. In other words, the general public is as ignorant as the typical church goer - they want entertainment, not content - ask any preacher!

 

[InTheLight]

I am getting tired of the innuendo laden argument, "you just know if conservatives did something, then the media would report it differently than if a liberal had done it..." Classic Rush Limbaugh-ism.

Protesting in front of a clinic is illegal. Protesting on a campus, which is public property in state university systems, is not illegal. Seems to me that the "reporting" in this article exhibits the very defects that the OP attempted to point out.

 

[mandym]

I am getting tired of the innuendo laden argument, "you just know if conservatives did something, then the media would report it differently than if a liberal had done it..." Classic Rush Limbaugh-ism.

Protesting in front of a clinic is illegal. Protesting on a campus, which is public property in state university systems, is not illegal. Seems to me that the "reporting" in this article exhibits the very defects that the OP attempted to point out.

Apparently you missed the point. Protesting in front of anything and blocking access is illegal. The op is not discussing legalities. It is discussing the reporting on of protesting. And the occupiers have been working to block traffic to businesses and the far left media ignore those facts hense the comparison.