Sunday, May 16, 2004
J. Carroll's J-School
For my fellow masochists, I offer "Pseudo-Journalists Betray the Public Trust," by John S. Carroll, Editor of the Los Angeles Times. (www.latimes.com)
Cancel My Subscription NOW!
If you didn't get to read the Carroll editorial, I'll summarize it for you.
Editor Carroll seems to think old school journalism has been besieged by the pseudo-journalists--we know who we are--who whip up the country (people are stupid) and lie about facts. Further, he tries to defend himself and his paper for holding the Schwarzenegger sexual abuse story till just before the election. Since Carroll says it didn't happen, that should be enough for Fox, et al., especially the schoolyard bully (read Roger Ailes). He wants an apology.
Naturally he mentioned the Pulitzers the paper won, which I might point out is given to articles and features, not to the paper. So, it ain't yours to brag about too much, John.
He does go on with precision usage of political language and disgusting imagery, ala "rotting fish" that belittles the subject. For instance, "...Among people who primarily watched Fox News, 80% believed one or more of those myths."
The myths to which he refers are:
1), Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction had been found; 2), Another was that the links had been proved between Iraq and Al Qaeda; and 3), That world opinion favored the idea of the U.S. invading Iraq.
So. His foregone conclusion is that 80% of the people are really too dense to know any better. He uses the term "serve the public, the reader" in a sense that connotes a "Trust me, I know better" bit of propaganda that's reminiscent of all the folks in the big media scene. Big metro editors, most of them, are of a leftist lean. There's no secret about that. They talk to each other...that's one of their problems. They also make way too much money.
John Carroll suggests to me that his reportage on the front page of his newspaper does not contain propaganda, after which, he accuses his competitors of the same thing, thus they're pseudo-journalists.
I mentioned last time there was a full out assault on the Bush Administration. This is just another example.
But this is as much about the competition with Roger Ailes and Newscorp (Fox), and especially with Rupert Murdoch. Carroll doesn't like it that Ailes was able to overturn the journalistic model, the template each editor has for himself.
Funny thing about real competition. John doesn't decide, Roger doesn't decide, the reader gets to make the choice. The Times has finally run into people who WILL fight someone who buys ink by the barrel! Hooray. No wonder they're scared.
Don't Worry. Be Happy
The final paragraph goes like this:
My guess is that they [the talk-show fans] sat back on their sofa and consoled themselves with more soothing thoughts, such as the way President Bush saved America from catastrophe by seizing those weapons of mass destruction in Iraq while the whole world cheers.
I'd like to thank John Carrol for selecting the Op/Ed section for placement of his piece instead of the usual disguised-as-news lead, as is the Times' hallmark, in the News section.
Sigma Delta Chi/Society of Professional Journalists Have a Code
Carroll opens his piece:
One reason I was drawn to my chosen career is its informality. Unlike doctors, lawyers or even jockeys, journalists have no entrance exams, no licenses, no governing body...Beneath its surface lies something deadly serious...it is a code. Sometimes the code is not even written down, but is deeply believed in. And when violated, it is enforced with TRIBAL ferocity.
Meanwhile, I think I'll just decide for myself. Thanks, though, for your concern about your role in my life.
Thanks for the read.
Cancel My Subscription NOW!
If you didn't get to read the Carroll editorial, I'll summarize it for you.
Editor Carroll seems to think old school journalism has been besieged by the pseudo-journalists--we know who we are--who whip up the country (people are stupid) and lie about facts. Further, he tries to defend himself and his paper for holding the Schwarzenegger sexual abuse story till just before the election. Since Carroll says it didn't happen, that should be enough for Fox, et al., especially the schoolyard bully (read Roger Ailes). He wants an apology.
Naturally he mentioned the Pulitzers the paper won, which I might point out is given to articles and features, not to the paper. So, it ain't yours to brag about too much, John.
He does go on with precision usage of political language and disgusting imagery, ala "rotting fish" that belittles the subject. For instance, "...Among people who primarily watched Fox News, 80% believed one or more of those myths."
The myths to which he refers are:
1), Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction had been found; 2), Another was that the links had been proved between Iraq and Al Qaeda; and 3), That world opinion favored the idea of the U.S. invading Iraq.
So. His foregone conclusion is that 80% of the people are really too dense to know any better. He uses the term "serve the public, the reader" in a sense that connotes a "Trust me, I know better" bit of propaganda that's reminiscent of all the folks in the big media scene. Big metro editors, most of them, are of a leftist lean. There's no secret about that. They talk to each other...that's one of their problems. They also make way too much money.
John Carroll suggests to me that his reportage on the front page of his newspaper does not contain propaganda, after which, he accuses his competitors of the same thing, thus they're pseudo-journalists.
I mentioned last time there was a full out assault on the Bush Administration. This is just another example.
But this is as much about the competition with Roger Ailes and Newscorp (Fox), and especially with Rupert Murdoch. Carroll doesn't like it that Ailes was able to overturn the journalistic model, the template each editor has for himself.
Funny thing about real competition. John doesn't decide, Roger doesn't decide, the reader gets to make the choice. The Times has finally run into people who WILL fight someone who buys ink by the barrel! Hooray. No wonder they're scared.
Don't Worry. Be Happy
The final paragraph goes like this:
My guess is that they [the talk-show fans] sat back on their sofa and consoled themselves with more soothing thoughts, such as the way President Bush saved America from catastrophe by seizing those weapons of mass destruction in Iraq while the whole world cheers.
I'd like to thank John Carrol for selecting the Op/Ed section for placement of his piece instead of the usual disguised-as-news lead, as is the Times' hallmark, in the News section.
Sigma Delta Chi/Society of Professional Journalists Have a Code
Carroll opens his piece:
One reason I was drawn to my chosen career is its informality. Unlike doctors, lawyers or even jockeys, journalists have no entrance exams, no licenses, no governing body...Beneath its surface lies something deadly serious...it is a code. Sometimes the code is not even written down, but is deeply believed in. And when violated, it is enforced with TRIBAL ferocity.
Meanwhile, I think I'll just decide for myself. Thanks, though, for your concern about your role in my life.
Thanks for the read.
