26 Comments

1. Bruce W.:

Perhaps, then, it is irritation that is the highest form of flattery.

Would that they go the imitation route.

Feb 15, 2005 - 8:59 am 2. George:

In l’affaire Eason, some of the MSM nitwits went overboard in their scathing critiques of the blogs.

But there also were some thoughtful people (eg, Kurtz and Rosen) who seemed worried about an Alice in Wonderland scenario: sentence first, trial afterwards. I was surprised by the number of bloggers who explicitly assumed that failure to release the tape from the WEF session was “proof” of “guilt” — and I don’t remember anyone enquiring who might have actual control of such a tape.

A few more “victories” like Easongate and I predict some bloggers will start to attract some very critical attention from a few of their heretofore good friends.

Feb 15, 2005 - 10:01 am 3. Dishman:

It seems to me that Columbia School of Journalism as an organization must feel particularly threatened. IIRC, Geraghty is the only big blogging name who came from there. They charge top dollar for their piece of paper, and now there are millions of people engaging in journalism without it.

Feb 15, 2005 - 10:01 am 4. RogerA:

George: It seems to me all that many (certainly not all) bloggers were asking for was for the tape to be released so a judgment could be made. And there was considerable discussion on most blogs who were following the Eason flap about the control of the tape.

Bloggers are, to me, simply another source of news; as one who has followed blogs since 2003, I have found them to provide much needed perspective to the increasing sloppy, arrogant, and irrelevant MSM.

Feb 15, 2005 - 10:12 am 5. JK Ribera:

I don’t quite understand you, George. I didn’t notice blogs calling for the firing of Jordan, but for the release of the tape. One would assume that since it was not released and Jordan was fired, that it was pretty incriminating. Whatever the case, why would you blame the bloggers for this?

Feb 15, 2005 - 10:12 am 6. Rick Ballard:

Roger,

Some day I hope you share your thoughts with us concerning how you see the differentiation between writing as a craft, as a trade and as an adjunct to a profession. It may be that fear rather than jealousy is driving Mr. Lovelady. Certainly, Jordan’s assertions smearing the military without provision of a hint of a fact bear witness that “journalism” is a profession only in the sense of the oldest “profession”. Just something one does for money. Mr. Lovelady has spent considerable time and effort in the promulgation of the idea that journalism is a true profession with standards and accountability. The bloggers exposure of Mr. Jordan’s revelatory comments in Portugal and at Davos put the lie to that assertion quite effectively.

If one thinks of himself as a gate keeper for a profession and finds that he is not even a guildmaster for an honorable craft (as long as Dan sits in his chair every night, no discipline has been exercised) then fear must be a familiar companion. To read bloggers every day who write certainly as well as, and in most cases far better than many journalists, while at the same time exercising a clarity of logic notable in its absence from the average journalist’s story, must be a cause for nightmares for Mr. Lovelady. His phoney-baloney job does depend on the credulity of the students at Columbia and if bloggers keep rending the veil, well, the future just isn’t as bright as it once was.

Feb 15, 2005 - 10:19 am 7. Knucklehead:

I think Jordan got what he deserved. He was, IMO, deliberately feeding his audience a slander he knew they wanted to hear. That is not what major news executives should be doing.

That said, George has a valid point. We don’t know that Jordan or CNN had any authority to release the video of the session. That authority, one might presume, lies somewhere within the WEF. That said, yet again, there doesn’t seem to be any indication that CNN or Jordan requested that the WEF release the video. Is it possible that, even worse than EJ’s comment, would be the reaction to it by the Barking Moonbats around him. That is what they don’t want the unwashed masses to witness for themselves.

Feb 15, 2005 - 10:29 am 8. Knucklehead:

Rick,

There are probably a variety of “fears” and “indignations” at work. As you and/or others have pointed out, a journalism degree from Columbia (or anywhere else) is not inexpensive. Seeing the “untrained” threaten one’s alleged profession must, to the journos, feel somewhat like being a VB programmer or call center “professional” watching one’s job get “outsourced” to “little brown people who still piss in their drinking water”. They aren’t ready to face up to the fact that what they paid a lot of money to be certified at is a rather common skill.

On the fear side, there is fear of potential loss of their ability to make a living, perhaps, and also some nagging fear that the salivating morons are going to harangue them out of a job if they make one verbal misstep somewhere in their career. I don’t believe either of those example fears are particularly warranted, but what do I know.

Feb 15, 2005 - 10:38 am 9. George:

George: It seems to me all that many (certainly not all) bloggers were asking for was for the tape to be released so a judgment could be made.

Yes, but when the tape wasn’t released, it was “off with his head!” Days before his resignation, Powerline (no lightweight) pronounced Jordan “finished.”

And there was considerable discussion on most blogs … about the control of the tape.

I’ve followed the debate with reasonable care. But I still don’t know who or under what circumstances the tape or a transcript can be released.

One would assume that since it was not released and Jordan was fired, that it was pretty incriminating.

With all due respect, that’s a pretty sorry example of logic. A number of people were involved in the WEF session, and they no doubt talked of many things. A number of things said might have been embarrassing to the speaker if the entire session were made public. Despite the apparent impressions of some in the blogging community, Eason Jordan and his “targeting” remark were not the only things that transpired at Davos.

Feb 15, 2005 - 10:49 am 10. Rick Ballard:

Knucklehead,

Well, Gerard certainly leans in that direction. I don’t think that there is an “either A or B” type of explanation.

I’m still more exercised about journos attending “off the record” coffee klatches with NGO’s who siphon suckers wallets while spitting on them. Jordan’s just the pustule of the moment.

Feb 15, 2005 - 10:52 am 11. ROA:

George,

At a minimum it would seem reasonable for Jordan to have requested a transcript of his comments with responses of others given anonymously. This would have enabled everyone to know what he actually said without seriously compromising the supposed confidentiality of the session.

Feb 15, 2005 - 10:57 am 12. Kevin P:

George:

The problem with the traditional media’s ripping of the blogs is the way they are using some valid critiques of the blogasphere to hide their lazy and sloppy coverage of the Jordan story. Even now how many MSM stories on the Jordan affair have included the Portugal qoute? When they claim that we can not truly know about what was on the tape they never rarely include the responses of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd. If Eason didn’t say that the military was targeting journalists why did Frank ask him to provide evidence so he could investigate? Surely neither of these Democrats could be considered members of the of the vast right wing conspiracy and they surely have not been strong supporters of the war. If you take in all of the eyewitness accounts of the Davos conversation it is fair to conclude that Jordan started the conversation by stating that the US military was targeting journalists. Yet the traditional media is hiding behind the lack of the tape to refuse to connect the dots. If the Davos was off the record why why did they record it? That doesn’t make sense. CNN and Jordan could have requested that only Jordans transcripts were released tp protect any of the other members suppossed off the record words.

The traditional media is bending over backwards in their attempt not to cover this story. The fact that the blogs did cover it and put pressure on Jordan to be honest about what he said should not be a black mark against the blogs.The fact that the MSM refuses to bring up the Guardian qoute shows that they do not want to bring the whole story out. That is just sloppy journalism. They are attacking the blogs because they got caught with their pants down and instead of noting the fine reporting that the blogs have done they lash out at the group that beat them at their own game. What is the MSM’s biggest critique of the blogs? that they put out rumours and innuendo and there are no fact checkers to stop them. When Jordan does the very thing that is supposedly the habit of the blogs the MSM jumps thru hoops to hide his lazy journalism and attacks the writers that exposed his slanders.

Feb 15, 2005 - 11:18 am 13. charlotte:

Brilliantly recovering Roger is on to something here- the MSM do seem jealous and resentful. For several years now, they have endured the insult of their institutionalized bias and incompetence being laid bare by good blogging. But not only are the traditional media feeling ‘disrespected’, they believe they have turf rights to protect for future influence and profit. They are hard-boiled partisan and corporate to the core. Where bloggers’ intentions were to prompt reform in a partisan media so that as a nation we could have fairer political discourse, for the MSM it has become a winner-take-all territory fight over their leftist worldview, Democrat activism and, of course, the money.

Most/ nearly all targeting of the media that centrist and conservative bloggers have done is fair game and long overdue regarding what is done and said in their capacity as journalists, news anchors, editors and execs. But the only way the MSM and the Left know how to respond to blogger pressure for media to act responsibly is to act even more recklessly. Instead of acknowledging their ideological lock-step and curbing tactics of biased reporting and ad hominem attacks, they engage in name-calling. Incredibly, they who spin headlines and punch up ledes with piranha-like frenzy when they detect blood, Republican blood, fairly drawn or not, call their blogger critics a lynch mob.

Apparently, the main media and its blogger-left apologists believe the only reason Rather and Jordan were taken down “so unjustly” is because their critics weren’t taken out first. Living down to our expectations of leftist thinking and media manipulations, they now may be willing to engage in “opposition research”, smear and innuendo to kill the (non-Atrios/Kos) blogger-messenger. I’m beginning to think somebody made McAuliffe chairman of the MSM and I missed the announcement.

Btw, Rick Ballard’s comments are always A+.

Feb 15, 2005 - 11:25 am 14. rastajenk:

Bob Beckel’s performance last night on Hannity & Tombs was one for the books. Reminded me of Lawrence O’Donnell’s meltdown a few months ago. He is either completely disconnected from the New Reality, or he is simply unhinged. Either way, it weren’t pretty.

Feb 15, 2005 - 11:48 am 15. Terrye:

George:

I think the point is Eason Jordan has been making unsubstantiated remarks like this for years and for the first time he got called on them and could not back them up.

The problem with the media is they believe their own bs.

rasta:

Beckel is so annoying I mute him. I do in my living room what I would like to do elsewhere…tell him to shut up already. He was one of the many reasons I left the party. dimwit. I can’t believe I have to work as hard as I do for the money I make when these socalled experts run around making money just shooting their mouths off.

Feb 15, 2005 - 12:14 pm 16. Kevin P:

George:

Who did a more complete investigation of the story, the MSM or the blogs? Who did the legwork do bring up Jordans Portugal qoutes? The blogs. Who responded to the hotel attack allegations and dug up the qoutes from Jordans own reporters who were eyewitneses to the attack and stated that the army thought they were shooting at spotters and had no idea that there were reporters there? the blogs. Where do you get all of the COMPLETE statements of the people who heard Jordans words at Davos and not just Gergens defense of Jordan. The blogs. I subscribe to the LA Times and there was virtually zero coverage of the story but within days I am sure they will print editorials attacking the blogs and their lack of standards but if I had counted on them to know about this story I would be completly in the dark.I will get their attacks of the blogs but I will not get the hard facts that you need to have an informed opinion of this story.The bulk of the MSM are acting as Jordan’s defense attorneys and not like journalists.If they believe Jordan is right then they should be attacking CNN not the blogs. The blogs took up this story and there are more verifiable facts and more context in the blogs then there are in any MSM coverage of this story.They either do not know all the facts or they are intentionally not reporting them to cover their own laziness.I guarantee that the number of hand ringing editorials in the MSM will dwarf the actual MSM reporting on this story.Show me an MSM story that has as much raw data as Captain Ed’s posts. Real qoutes, complete statements, and actual context. If you find it give me the link. The blogs covered this story. The MSM ignored it and know is striking out at the blogs to hide their own sloppy and lazy journalism

Feb 15, 2005 - 12:20 pm 17. ahem:

This reminds me of a remark I once heard from Philip Glass to the effect that (I’m paraphrasing),’talent is very democratically distributed about humanity.’ I agree. Most of us have more ability than we’ll ever use.

Feb 15, 2005 - 12:22 pm 18. Bostonian:

George,

As with many other news stories, the interesting (and often telling) part is the silences.

Jordan & CNN could have said something like, “the tape backs up my story, but we do not have authority to release it.” Instead, Jordan & CNN were silent here.

They could have acknowledged the fact that Jordan had made similar remarks in the past, already reported in the press. Instead, they were silent here.

Or they could have said that there was truth to Jordan’s claims, but that he didn’t have the evidence to back it up on the spot. Silence here too.

They could have said they were working on a story and that Jordan got ahead of himself and/or exaggerated. Nope. Silence.

I think the bloggers & their audiences reacted to these silences at least as much as to what CNN & Jordan were willing to say.

Feb 15, 2005 - 12:29 pm 19. neo-neocon:

No one likes being shown up, and the MSM is being left behind in a cloud of dust by the bloggers. I agree with you; I think they are jealous. And, I might add, I think they are also very frightened and threatened–and when people are threatened, they tend to strike out in response.

I think they have every reason to feel both jealous and threatened, because the caliber of writing of many in the blogosphere (including, naturally, our esteemed host!) so often surpasses that in the MSM. The caliber of thinking and of research, particularly among some of the lawyer-bloggers such as Powerline, often surpasses anything usually seen in the MSM, who feel the hot breath of the bloggers on their necks.

Feb 15, 2005 - 12:52 pm 20. heather:

on dropping by The Galley Slaves, I was directed to libertyfiles.blogspot.com. If their story is correct, Eason Jordan ought to be jailed (really):

Eason Jordan Now Has Blood on His Hands

Eason Jordan may have gotten U.S. spies/informants killed according to Reese Schoenfeld, CNN co-founder.

Jordan has been breaking new ground in journalistic ethics over the past few years for CNN. First, we discovered through him a few years ago that CNN sat on stories of Saddam’s treaty violations for over ten years to position itself favorably with his government. Then we just heard his outrageous claim that the U.S. military was intentionally targeting journalists.

So this morning, on Fox & Friends, Reese Schonfeld tells Steve Doocy and Brian Kilmeade that Jordan leaked the names of two CIA-recruited operatives while he was in Amman. Knowing that Amman was a “sieve” to Baghdad as Schonfeld claimed, Jordan led Saddam’s government to these informants and got them killed. Schonfeld was not clear as to whether these were U.S.-recruited Iraqi informants or actual American operatives out of Langley, but it really makes no difference.

The funny thing is that there is no reason to leak such people’s names other than to expose them. Which raises another question of journalistic ethics: were these guys sources of his? And did he, against the canons of journalism, reveal their identities because he didn’t like the nature of the help they were giving the U.S.?

This is no longer a case of journalistic bias, but rather treason. This man may have gotten American human intelligence assets killed. Knowing that CNN was complicit in Saddam’s illegal activities to get scoops, this report leaves the impression that Jordan may have done this to prevent the government from undercutting Saddam’s Iraq and/or to retain CNN’s favored position with that government.

CORRECTION:

It wasn’t Iraq’s treaty violations (although we don’t know what CNN knew), but rather the human rights abuses of Saddam upon which they sat. My pre-coffee mistake.

Feb 15, 2005 - 1:09 pm 21. Cobb:

Speaking of undercover sources, isn’t it just a matter of time until anonymous whistleblowers start sending things to blogs instead of the MSM? What then?

Let 1000 Deep Throats bloom.

Feb 15, 2005 - 1:27 pm 22. Rick Ballard:

Here is the transcript of Schonfeld’s comments (from Johnny Dollar’s blog).

Schonfeld also repeats the discredited narrative of the Palestine Hotel incident. I believe that Eason Jordan’s indiscretion in Amman has been previously reported.

Feb 15, 2005 - 2:15 pm 23. photoncourier.blogspot.com:

In general, people insist on honor being paid to their “professional status” in inverse proportion to the difficulty of achieving that status. A PhD in Education is more likely to insist on being called “Doctor” than a PhD in metallurgy.

Precisely because it does not involve special knowledge or estoteric skills, people in journalism will be highly protective of their special professional status.

Feb 15, 2005 - 2:52 pm 24. Catherine:

Roger! You’re back! Get some rest! Take your painkillers! (I’m serious. Pain is bad for you.)

OK, well, I’m just going to go ahead and jump in with a wounded pride response on this one.

It is a great craft and presents its own problems. But they are on a different level. There is a reason David E. Kelley makes a gazillion dollars and you never heard of Steve Lovelady until he attacked blogs.

There is a reason David E. Kelley makes a gazillion dollars and you never heard of Steve Lovelady, but it’s not because David E. Kelley is a TV producer and Steve Lovelady is a journalist.

I feel a need to point this out because just the other night I went to pick up my son at his friend’s house, and I got to talking & drinking wine with his parents, both of whom are attorneys.

They’ve just started to be unhappy with our school district’s newly adopted fuzzy math curriculum.

As some of you may have noticed, I’m way ahead of them on that one. I can now recite a complete oral history of the Math Wars on demand, and I have a track record on the Home Intervention front to boot. In the 6 months I’ve been home-tutoring my son in Saxon Math he has gone from flunking the last two-of-six unit tests in fourth grade to getting As on his first two Unit tests in 5th grade, to, just three weeks ago, being moved up to the accelerated ‘Phase 4′ math class–a unique event in the annals of our school’s history, it appears, where the normal movement mid-year is down, not up. So far he has 2 Bs in the new class, and he says today’s test was easy, which is a good sign.

So there I was, wowing everyone with my homeschooling prowess, when the other mom said, “You should teach all of our kids. We’ll send them to you.”

I was nodding and beaming and agreeing it would be a lot of fun to tutor their kids in math when she added, “You’d make a lot more money than you do in publishing.”

What happened next was that I just sat there staring blankly at her, not saying, Excuse me! I am a NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLING AUTHOR! THAT DOES NOT MAKE ME DAVID E. KELLEY, BUT IT DOES MAKE ME, AT A MINIMUM, A PERSON WHO WILL NOT MAKE MORE MONEY TUTORING YOUR CHILDREN IN MATH THAN I WILL ‘IN PUBLISHING.’

After I didn’t say that, I went on to not add that, until now, my main stock in trade has been persuading publishing companies to pay me more than I am worth; i.e., there has been no time throughout my work life in publishing when I would have made more money tutoring other people’s children than I did (and will) writing books and magazine articles.

I realize I have just confirmed Roger’s point that journalists are not David E. Kelley. David E. Kelley, I think we can all safely assume, probably does not sit around thinking ‘It would be wrong to brag‘ when he has been severely dissed.

David E. Kelley probably does not get severely dissed in the normal course of affairs.

But seeing as how I blew my lines so egregiously the other night I’m taking advantage of Roger’s post to point out that there is a whole big, huge range of nonfiction journalistic writing that, if not remotely David Kelley-like in financial return, is more than adequate to pay the bills. And you don’t have to deal with TV actors and 30-year old network executives to do it.

I’m sorry.

I had to say that.

Here’s my point.

I’m reading MONEYBALL today, which is pure gold (and highly motivating on the math front, that’s for sure). If I got to choose between David E. Kelley’s life and Michael Lewis’s, my pick would be Michael Lewis, hands down.

I’d bet the ranch Steve Lovelady feels the same way.

Feb 15, 2005 - 3:24 pm 25. Catherine:

Well I for one would like to know the real story . . . which Kurtz & Kaus seem to have something of a line on.

Why is Jordan out so fast?

Why was there almost no circling of the wagons?

Is Marianne Pearl & the marital breakup the problem?

How much of the problem?

Feb 15, 2005 - 3:30 pm 26. richard mcenroe:

George ó Oh, come now. First off, nothing prevents the WEF from releasing on Jordan’s taped statements.

Secondly, Ed Morrissey at Captain’s Quarters directly contacted the WEF about the tape. You can read their rationalizations there.

Feb 15, 2005 - 8:40 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: