The self-regarding MSM
Media - - Posted on August, 4 at 4:36 pm by Ken L
Gosh you have to laugh when you read something like this:
Australian political bloggers are venturing down the same path but with key differences. Websites with names such as Mumble (www.mumble.com.au), Oz Politics, Possums Pollytics, Poll Bludger, Psephos, the Piping Shrike, New Matilda, Righthinker and Blogspot run commentary that mainstream-media critics say often confuses fact with opinion, and base opinion on ignorance and prejudice. All the while they feed off the commercial media, particularly The Australian.
And to answer the question that I know you’re desperate to ask: yes, this does indeed come from The Australian, which seems to have declared war on the blogosphere. But I have to say, the implications of the passage quoted are a bit rich. Talk about not removing the beam from your own eye before you start trying to get the mote from somebody else’s.
It’s almost routine these days for featured stories in the MSM to be sourced completely to people who ’spoke on condition of anonymity’ or some such. The ‘facts’ disclosed by these anonymous sources frequently turn out to be incomplete, selective or plain wrong, yet the MSM keep churning them out regardless.
To give just one example: the lazy acceptance that every violent act in the known universe is the work of either al Qaeda or of people affiliated with, linked to, sponsored by or otherwise associated with al Qaeda has become so notorious that it’s a joke. Just yesterday I was about to put up a post about a Reuters item that kicked off with a reference to the ‘al Qaeda attack on Glasgow airport’. I was going to say it was news to me that the incident had been verified as the work of al Qaeda when I checked back and the item had stealthily changed, presumably because others had objected to the sloppy absence of fact-checking.
Two very recent events in the MSM scream out for somebody to be called to account for running crap that appears to have been complete fabrication. The first is the ‘Indian police dossier’ on Haneef Mahomed casually tossed on the table by SBS. The second is the News Ltd story claiming that the AFP was investigating claims that Haneef ‘was part of a planned terrorist attack on a landmark building at the Gold Coast’ - claims that were promptly denied by the AFP.
If News Ltd and SBS had any genuine concern for their reputations, they would be investigating how such dodgy material came to be published, taking steps to make sure it doesn’t happen again, and explaining to the public what went wrong and how they’ve fixed it. Needless to say they’ll do nothing of the kind.
The MSM has long been regarded as a deeply flawed institution, one that plays a useful role in the community but is all too often guilty of laziness, prejudice, bias and downright incompetence. For The Australian to keep adopting this attitude of moral superiority to bloggers is simply childish, and sends a clear signal that the precious egos of the old guard are more threatened by the emergence of new media than they care to admit.
Posted in Media |
August 4th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
How about some of the News Ltd “commentators”, like Piers Akerman, who can’t write an accurate article to save his life. I just did a blog post on his latest gem, but if the Australian wants to look for examples of ignorant and prejudiced writing, perhaps they should start closer to home!
August 4th, 2007 at 6:08 pm
Like girls dressing up for a night out. Their young beaux think that the clothes and the makeup are for them, but its really dressing to impress the other girls
Similarly, the MSM journalists are just talking to each other, sending dominance signals with the bylined equivalent of a puffed out throat pouch or a shiny red arse.
I think a bit more ‘treat em mean and keep em keen’ from the blogs will be needed before the MSM comes to the mating party willingly…
August 4th, 2007 at 6:41 pm
zebbidies spring…
LMAO!
I vote that post of the week.
August 4th, 2007 at 7:04 pm
That report in the Murdoch press from two weeks ago was an absolute shocker. I would love to know who the ’senior government source’ was.
I would also love to know how on earth the story was ever considered news. There had never been any suggestion that Dr Haneef was planning an attack in Australia.
August 4th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
Aren’t these guys a hoot?
They finally get off their backsides & do some REAL reporting…but simultaneously they have to demonstrate they’re a selfish profit making venture that intends to use their power & privileged access to the population to crush any opposition, including the far more democratic blogosphere.
In the long run, they’re just a bunch of well paid hacks propping up a corrupt & rigged system.
W/ the odd exception. We know who they are. But even that lot act guarded or pull back in case they step over the BOSSES’ line.
If the News Ltd. journos & editors spent more time focusing on the excesses & corruption of this Federal Government & focused on the Siev-X disaster, Nauru, Cabinet member’s roles in the wheat for weapon’s scandal & other related activities…and the obvious CON being perpetuated on the citizenry by some Multi-National Corporations, CEOs & our Governments…the more interested i’d be in their paper & such.
Still way too much fluff & diversionary stuff as far as I’m concerned.
Sure, they’ll savage a few Coalition scapegoats…& rebels…but let’s face it, Rupert generally doesn’t let the pack off their leashes unless it suits his financial & political aims. One hell of a way to run a newspaper.
These puppets spend the bulk of their time kickin’ down the systems & institutions that help support the little people cause they haven’t got the guts or PERMISSION to go after the BIG GUYS & GALS. Don’t wanna piss in their feed trough, so to speak.
What else do we expect from News Ltd?
SHOW ME THE MONEY!
August 4th, 2007 at 8:14 pm
What’s with Norington’s dumping on the blog names. Are they any worse than The Daily Telegraph, The Mercury, Herald Sun or Courier-Mail?
August 4th, 2007 at 10:16 pm
“the lazy acceptance that every violent act in the known universe is the work of either al Qaeda”. The only reason I can think of for al Qaeda not claiming the Minnesota bridge collapse as their work is that as an organisation it no longer exists.
August 4th, 2007 at 10:50 pm
Good one Ken.
I was quite shocked that SBS gave us the dodgy dossier story, but I think it’s all about this rush to break stories. It’s almost like, better put it out there and pray it’s true, because if you hold it someone else might break it first.
Interesting how bloggers are accused of using the MSM for our facts, but also accused of being based on ignorance. Really highlights the responsibility of the MSM to provide accurate information in the first place, doesn’t it?
August 4th, 2007 at 11:28 pm
The only reason I can think of for al Qaeda not claiming the Minnesota bridge collapse as their work is that as an organisation it no longer exists.
Well, the only possible excuse for God’s behaviour is that He does not exist.
Maybe al Qaeda’s claiming the same defence?
August 4th, 2007 at 11:30 pm
Damn italics tag!
Duh.
August 4th, 2007 at 11:39 pm
Wait, what?
Blogspot?
Meaning all blogs hosted by Google?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:43 am
Hey Ken,
Shouldn’t Tim Dunlop answer similar questions about “reputation”, and about “what went wrong and how they fixed it”?
August 5th, 2007 at 2:59 am
On Bill Moyers’ Journal report, “Buying the War”, Dan Rather made the extraordinary admission that:
The truth about blogs is that without them, the MSM and the government would never be subjected to such close scrutiny. We would still be forced to accept the bullshit that for decades we were fed as truth. It is we who keep them honest - at least more honest than they naturally tend to be. The “blogosphere” is full of intelligent and thoughtful people who simply will not let rubbery figures or false logic go unchallenged and who hold authorities to their word. Or try to. Haneef has his freedom largely thanks to the bloggers and their communities who questioned the process. And no thanks to the MSM who merely followed the bloggers’ lead.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:08 am
“All the while they feed off the commercial media, particularly The Australian.”
Well if the Government Gazette insists on faithfully publishing as fact whatever lie du Jour comes out of some flunkey’s mouth in Canberra, why the hell shouldn’t the Blogosphere pull-up their stories and use ‘em for target practise?
If you can’t stand the heat, don’t push the propaganda.
August 5th, 2007 at 5:14 am
It’s a bit pathetic that Murdoch’s main mouthpiece in Australia is doing its best to ape the attacks on the liberal blogosphere going on by Fox News in the US.
Take heart blogosphere, I say: first they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:08 am
I don’t believe that the awfully named ‘blogosphere’ has any kind of claim to challenging the MSM for truth, accuracy or the Australian way at this time. It will in the future though, but right now it seems to be in a state of evolvement that will seriously challenge the TV snack news and the owner-opinion-oriented newspapers a little further down the track. MSM seems to see this, and are entering the familiar knee jerk attack mode.
Personally I immensely appreciate the existence of the (teeth gritted) blogosphere (teeth un-gritted) as it presents a wide range of opinions that can be tapped and allows readers to form more definite opinions for themselves.
F’rinstance troll through Larvatus Prodeo then move over to Tim Blair and see if you notice anything. Then read Man of Lettuce to bring you back to the real world.
August 5th, 2007 at 7:34 am
Hey Megan…so are what are we then?
the resistance that slipped under the fence & were missed by the Murdoch surveillance cameras…?
ever thought about the pressure Tim might be under?
social revolutions happen Megan…primarily when the BIG GUYS realise they’re gonna lose wads of cash & possibly their dynasties if they don’t listen to the rumblings, make a few alterations. Particularly when the kids tell them things need to improve…like Reagan’s did.
Now, i congratulate you on pointing out inconsistencies & hypocritical shit when it comes to our polies…in fact trying to keep the bastard honest is highly commendable…i’m w/ you all the way…
but trust me, if you think overthrowing Government in any way bar peaceful demos, the blogs, voting, artistic expression etc…is the way to go…well, just look at the societies immediately post the French, English & Russian revolutions. A bunch of delusional paranoids, neurotics, control freaks & mobsters stompin’ on everything left, right & centre. If that shit comes down, be very aware of your families’ surname, contacts, religion etc…cause once the TERROR of revolution begins it barely discriminates.
imho, Tim is ridin’ the rapids…& maybe he’s borrowed the BIG man’s oars…but the canoe is his…& Gaia knows where the river takes us all…& mebbe the BIG man is more worried, more curious, more interested than we know…cause he ain’t stupid, he knows a good thing when he sees it.
Who knows?
Noone bugs me more than Murdoch. Cause he has so much potential…he’s so freakin’ smart…sometimes innovative…but he seems to be so caught up in traumas, obsessions & crap we can’t begin to understand.
But mebbe if we show a bit of courage…& confidence in our adventure…we might OPEN THEIR EYES…to a NEW WORLD. Mebbe the CHESS PLAYERS are gettin’ bored of playin’ the same GAME. And like the fact we show some passion & ideas.
And mebbe, they’ll even put that safety net back in place. And take the foot off the War accelerator…
Before it’s too late.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:24 am
I don’t see any connection to be honest. My post is about journalists misreporting ‘facts’ and uncritically regurgitating factually flawed narratives written by others. I’m not aware that Tim has been accused of either. In any event he isn’t a journalist nor does he purport to be one.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:34 pm
Wow!
No need to be so defensive. I’m sure Tim has fully explained it to you guys in private. It’s just that the idea was, he would explain it to his public.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:42 pm
Megan no, Tim hasn’t explained it to me in private. I’ve never even met him and our communication has consisted of an occasional email about RTS-related matters.
If you want to pursue it, it would be better to do it on one of Tim’s threads and not here, where it’s irrelevant.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:51 pm
Websites with names such as Mumble (www.mumble.com.au), Oz Politics, Possums Pollytics, Poll Bludger, Psephos, the Piping Shrike, New Matilda, Righthinker and Blogspot…
John Witheld above touched on this - see how one of these things is not like the other? Some of them are blogs, New Matilda is a website for a MSM journal, blogspot is– a platform!! Talk about not even knowing what you are talking about!
Some journos’ pieces on the blogosphere really reveal how poor quality their much-vaunted research and fact checking really is.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:07 pm
Ken no, it’s not irrelevant to this thread.
Tim’s critique of the ‘Australian’s’ editorial about the bloggers was well argued and spot on.
The fact that Murdoch could then silence him, despite assurances that this could not happen, is the very reason why the blogs must stand alone and independent in opposition to the corporate media.
Otherwise it may as well just be “Blogaganda”.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:12 pm
the one time i noticed the blogsphere was in front of the msm was the santoro share scandal
blogs were a day ahead of the msm and it was evident that msm journalists were using the blogsphere as the source of their articles
the blogsphere wo’nt be taking seriously until it routinely breaks stories
August 5th, 2007 at 1:18 pm
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The Australian posts regular Right wing correspondents who repeatedly spout debunked falsehoods. According to them: Saddam Hussein had links to al Qaeda, he worked with al Zarqawi, was developing nuclear weapons and he kicked the weapons inspectors out. The war was also legal, no war crimes occurred and only 70,000 Iraqi civilians died following the invasion.
All of these claims have been dismissed by various US and UN government reports and officials. They are all demonstrably wrong as matters of fact and yet the The Oz continues to accept their publication even after the errors have been drawn to their attention. But what can you expect from a newspaper that last year called for the bombing of Iran - an act on a moral par with inviting readers to go out and murder strangers in the street!
The only reason we know anything about the international political landscape is because of the web and the blogs. There is no way that the likes of Greg Sheridan and Frank Devine can inform anyone. The Oz is exactly what it appears to be: a war-mongering, hard Right Murdoch rag. It’s a propaganda unit that can denounce Meersheimer and Walt as Nazis and publish Fred Kagan, Norman Podhoretz and the American Enterprise Institute without a hint of irony or even the tiniest acknowledgment that they are ideological mouthpieces for a US government actively seeking wars in the Middle East. The Oz is a disgrace. Pity anybody who has to rely on it for their international political news.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:14 pm
Megan no offence but by writing about ‘the blogs’ in this fashion you’re creating a collective institution that doesn’t exist. Individual blogs are writen by individual people for their own individual reasons. They don’t constitute some kind of social or political movement, no matter how much some would wish it otherwise. You might think you have a duty to wage a crusade against ‘the corporate media’ but you have no ethical standing to impose that duty on anyone else.
To paraphrase Monty Python, Tim’s not the messiah, he’s just a very capable blogger. Implying that he’s somehow accountable to ‘his public’ is without foundation. He’s never claimed to represent anybody in anything that I can recall reading. It’s not his fault if a few people want to transform him into a romantic Don Quixote charging at Establishment windmills.
Suggesting that News Ltd should be obliged to publish material that it judges to be damaging to its own commercial interests is ridiculous. What next, that a News Ltd writer should be free to recommend that readers buy The Age because The Australian is crap?
These are commercial matters between Tim and his client (or employer, I have no idea what his arrangement is). They are completely unrelated to the issues of editorial accuracy in a journal of record that I discussed in my post. One is concerned with commentary and opinion, the other concerns reporting of fact. It’s unfortunate that so many people - including of course many in the MSM - seem incapable of distinguishing between the two quite separate functions.
And if Tim said he would write a post about the spiked post at Blogocracy and subsequently changed his mind, so what? It’s nobody’s business but his.
August 5th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
I think this is utterly hilarious.
The nation’s national daily is getting engrossed in an internet flame war with bloggers.
Who’d have thunk “professional journalists” would dedicate so much of their highly paid time to something so childish and pathetic?
Uncle Rupert wouldn’t be pleased.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
oyster do blogs really need to be taken seriously? It’s not like we’re getting paid.
If anybody finds an inaccuracy on the info on my blog, I’ll correct it. If they want to attack me for bias, they’re welcome to. But ultimately my response is: you get the service you pay for. I do it purely for fun.
As for “professional journalists”, they’re the ones who need to be giving excuses.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:07 am
That the oz feels the heat enough to dedicate column space to it to me is a very positive sign,
obviously they feel stung enough to go on the defensive, wildly flailing about and not even able to grasp the concept. Somewhere between ridicule and a fight, victory must be close
August 7th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
At risk of being completely wrong and defamatory, i would not be surprised if Kerr is taking MSM cash to write articles that discredit Crikey.
His blatant partisanship and inaccuracy is something to behold - as is the phenomenon’s remarkable episodicity.
Either that or he has ‘issues’.