Comments on: Jeff Jarvis’s Cowardly Evasions (1)

By: dragonfly

dragonfly — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 23:57:52 +0000

If one is afflicted, the truth comes as no surprise,- and no comfort. If one is comfort able, who gives a damn bout the truth. The “saying” is not only not wise, it is truly stupid,like most things related to the “journalistic profession”. Once a craft or trade, It is now a calling pursued largely by dim-witted children of affluence, persuaded by socialist academics that they can “make the world a better place” by attacking greedy capitalism and lecturing their readers on the glories of deconstructionism and diversty, and the idolitry of vacuous incompetents like BHO, Something like being a “Professional Environmentalist”, a category formerly known as” Tree Worshippers”.

Like many others here, I know nothing of JJ or RR and the reason for their little spat over their noble means of livelihood. But I have been realizing of late that most of those I follow closely and trust in reportage and commentary are lawyers (!!), engineers, historians, economists – rational thinkers and serious searchers after the truth (like Steyn), rather than graduates in the “social sciences”, which apparently now includes journalism.

By: Swen Swenson

Swen Swenson — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 04:30:34 +0000

Didn’t get invited to “Fubai”, eh? Or is this the last of the rats eating each other as the ship sinks? Just wait until you sober up and see what you’ve written.

…

Oh, sorry. That would be reverse-engineering this little hissy fit, so I should probably just ask: What occasions this ill-tempered and embarrassingly ill-becoming display?

By: Zim

Zim — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:52:19 +0000

The MSM were so in the tank for Obama only the willfully blind could miss it. I don’t blame Obama for using this to his advantage, but the actions will have lasting effects on an industry that was already in trouble.

How is becoming the American Pravda, a bought-out sold-out entity to be used as a propaganda vehicle for the powerful, “comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable.”?

By: Bryan

Bryan — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:07:25 +0000

Ron, I would like your take on what some real journalists Mark Halperin think about how fake journalists, the people you seem to stand up for, handled the election coverage?
Do you really think they were completely unbiased and held true to journalistic standards they learned in J school?
How do you not think this has something to do with the lack of respect many of us have for so called “journalists.”
I for one have cancelled my subscription to the NYTimes, and it has nothing to do with my desire to read more blogs.
Halperin called the election media coverage “the most disgusting failure of people in our business since the Iraq war. It was extreme bias, extreme pro-Obama coverage.”
What is your take?

By: Vivictius

Vivictius — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 18:48:21 +0000

While I don’t really care for Jarvis, you sound like just another whining journalist crying for attention as the entire profession circles the drain.

By: Eric Gauvin

Eric Gauvin — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 21:59:33 +0000

“comfort the afflicted, and afflict the comfortable”

I think we need to understand the spirit of the meaning here. It’s not supposed to be taken literally. It means that truth can be a comfort to the afflicted and an affliction to the comfortable.

(in trying to be clever by switching around the nouns and verbs, the meaning gets a little poetic, don’t be so picky…)

By: David Thomson

David Thomson — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 06:36:12 +0000

“comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable”

This is truly a gross misunderstanding of the role of a “mainstream” journalist. It may also be the number one reason why bias slips into their reporting. Why should the so-called comfortable be afflicted? Did they do something wrong? Is it immoral to be “comfortable?” And no, I am not being facetious. The job of a journalist is be fair to everyone, to report the facts, and stay away from editorializing as much as possible. If someone indeed wishes to engage in advocacy writing—that is fine and dandy. They should therefore immediately seek employment with the National Review, Nation, or The New Republic. But this sort of writing is forbidden to the journalist hired by a legacy media outlet claiming to be “fair and objective.”

By: A. N. Pierson

A. N. Pierson — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 05:36:39 +0000

I remember Jarvis’ reaction to the debut of Pajamas Media as well – pathetic envy. Nowadays I rarely read him. He doesn’t have much of interest to say. My only quarrel with Rosenbaum why he wastes his time on such a person.

By: Bleepless

Bleepless — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 02:31:22 +0000

Midget-mindedness? Probably not; his raw I.Q. very likely is all right. But his soul? Another issue entirely.
In any event, you chose a target which richly deserves it.

By: Judy, NYC

Judy, NYC — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 00:48:46 +0000

the marble headstone for journalism can be found alongside serious novelists, painters, dramatists, newly conceived musicals and william schirer.

in any case, there are no journalistic standards because there is no demand for it. (there is however, as we have learned to our great sorrow, quite an intense demand for walmart’s price-slashed 50″ plazma tvs).

the intrepid journalist and compulsively driven editor with a flurry of fact-checkers exists only in the nostalgic fog of memory and mourning.
the common sense variety of interpreting information is gleaned from reality shows, CNN’s mostly baffled looking hosts and barbara walter’s moronic the view. it will have to suffice.

pajamas media gets it mostly right, nonetheless. i like visiting.