[Peace-discussion] RE: The American Press Liberal?
henry duke
henryduke2004@yahoo.com
Sun, 9 Mar 2008 16:23:58 -0700
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0072_01C88201.FC5B01E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Ugh! Tucker Carlson is one of the worse, fake reporters with a subaltern
anti-small d democratic, and pro-anarchist, pro-corporate agenda.
Did anyone catch Jon Stewart giving him the truth which he just could say
"duh" to?
Check it out, and lets here it for growing real journalists like Amy
Goodman, etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE
Henry
OC Greens / CODO Verde
Orange County Peace Action
_____
From: BDPOE@aol.com [mailto:BDPOE@aol.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 8:29 PM
To: BDPOE@aol.com
Subject: The American Press Liberal?
Published on Saturday, March 8, 2008 by Salon.com
Tucker Carlson Unintentionally Reveals The Role of The American Press
by Glenn Greenwald
The most interesting part of the controversy over Obama advisor Samantha
Power's referring to Hillary Clinton as a "monster" - one might say the only
interesting part - is that immediately after Power said it, she tried to
proclaim that it was "off the record." Here was Power's exact quote:
She is a monster, too - that is off the record - she is stooping to
anything.
But the reporter who was interviewing her, Britain's Gerri Peev of The
Scotsman, printed the comment anyway - as she should have, because Peev had
never agreed that any parts of the interview would be "off the record," and
nobody has the right to demand unilaterally, and after the fact, that
journalists keep their embarrassing remarks a secret. It's extremely likely,
though, that had Power been speaking to a typical reporter from the American
establishment media, her request to keep her comments a secret would have
been honored. In one of the ultimate paradoxes, for American journalists -
whose role in theory is to expose the secrets of the powerful - secrecy is
actually their central religious tenet, especially when it comes to dealing
with the most powerful. Protecting, rather than exposing, the secrets of the
powerful is the fuel of American journalism. That's how they maintain their
access to and good relations with those in power.
Illustrating that point as vividly as anything I can recall, MSNBC's Tucker
Carlson had Peev on his show last night and angrily criticized her
publication of Power's remarks. Carlson upbraided Peev for her lack of
deference to someone as important as Power, and Peev retorted by pointing
out exactly what that attitude reflects about Carlson and the American press
generally (via LEXIS; h/t Mike Stark):
CARLSON: What - she wanted it off the record. Typically, the arrangement is
if someone you're interviewing wants a quote off the record, you give it to
them off the record. Why didn't you do that?
PEEV: Are you really that acquiescent in the United States? In the United
Kingdom, journalists believe that on or off the record is a principle that's
decided ahead of the interview. If a figure in public life.
CARLSON: Right.
PEEV: Someone who's ostensibly going to be an advisor to the man who could
be the most powerful politician in the world, if she makes a comment and
decides it's a bit too controversial and wants to withdraw it immediately
after, unfortunately if the interview is on the record, it has to go ahead.
CARLSON: Right. Well, it's a little.
PEEV: I didn't set out in any way, shape.
CARLSON: Right. But I mean, since journalistic standards in Great Britain
are so much dramatically lower than they are here, it's a little much being
lectured on journalistic ethics by a reporter from the "Scotsman," but I
wonder if you could just explain what you think the effect is on the
relationship between the press and the powerful. People don't talk to you
when you go out of your way to hurt them as you did in this piece.
Don't you think that hurts the rest of us in our effort to get to the truth
from the principals in these campaigns?
PEEV: If this is the first time that candid remarks have been published
about what one campaign team thinks of the other candidate, then I would
argue that your journalists aren't doing a very good job of getting to the
truth. Now I did not go out of my way in any way, shape or form to hurt Miss
Power. I believe she's an intelligent and perfectly affable woman. In fact,
she's - she is incredibly intelligent so she - who knows she may have known
what she was doing.
She regretted it. She probably acted with integrity. It's not for me to
decide one way or the other whether she did the right thing. But I did not
go out and try to end her career.
Credit to Tucker Carlson for being so (unintentionally) candid about the
lowly, subservient role of the American press with regard to "the
relationship between the press and the powerful." A journalist should never
do anything that "hurts" the powerful, otherwise the powerful won't give
access to the press any longer. Presumably, the press should only do things
that please the powerful so that the powerful keep talking to the press, so
that the press in turn can keep pleasing the powerful, in an endless,
symbiotic, mutually beneficial cycle. Rarely does someone who plays the role
of a "journalist" on TV so candidly describe their real function. For anyone
who wants to dismiss Carlson as some buffoon who is unrepresentative of
journalists generally, I would refer them to the testimony at the Lewis
Libby trial of the mighty, revered Tim Russert, Washington Bureau Chief for
NBC News:
When I talk to senior government officials on the phone, it's my own policy
- our conversations are confidential. If I want to use anything from that
conversation, then I will ask permission.
As The Washington Post's Dan Froomkin put it: "That's not reporting, that's
enabling. That's how you treat your friends when you're having an innocent
chat, not the people you're supposed to be holding accountable." Unlike
Carlson, Tim Russert is the Big Guy of the American press corps. He's the
one they all look up to and admire, the one they invariably point to as
proof that tough, adversarial journalism is alive and well in the U.S. Yet
that's the same Tim Russert who admitted under oath that - even with no "off
the record" agreement - all of his conversations with government officials
are presumptively confidential, and he never reports anything unless they
give him explicit permission in advance to do so.
It's the same exact subservient mindset Carlson expressed last night, just
more formally and under oath. That's how the vast majority of them think and
behave. As Peev asked in astonishment when Carlson insisted Power's comments
should not have been published because doing "hurtful" things like that that
makes the powerful dislike reporters: "Are you really that acquiescent in
the United States?" See the Iraq War. Or the Bush administration. Or Tim
Russert's operating rules.
I just had a very similar issue arise last week, and not for the first time.
In response to media criticism I wrote, a well-known journalist emailed me
out of the blue, unsolicited, with very petulant, whiny objections to what I
had written. At the top of his email, he wrote "OFF THE RECORD," and he did
the same with a subsequent exchange. I had never communicated with him
before and never agreed to any such arrangement. But that's a common
practice among journalists and many political figures; they think that they
can unilaterally slap an "off the record" label on whatever they say and
expect that it will be honored.
I ended up not publishing that exchange solely because the probative value
was minimal and the primary effect from doing so would just have been to
make him look foolish for being so petulant and thin-skinned. Publishing it
would have been more vindictive and petty than instructive, so I didn't. But
his unilateral "OFF THE RECORD" designation played no role in my decision.
I considered publishing it, and I am certain that had I done so, he would
have accused me of acting improperly by publishing something he unilaterally
decreed to be "OFF THE RECORD." Just as Russert and Carlson said, rampant
secrecy is the coin of their realm, the fuel that greases their access.
Nothing should ever be disclosed unless everyone agrees to disclosure and it
doesn't "hurt" the person whose comments are being reported.
The number one rule of the standard establishment journalist is to avoid
offending the powerful because the more offense they give, the fewer favors
the powerful will do for the journalists. Conversely, and by logical
necessity, the more journalists please the powerful, the more favors the
powerful will do for them. As Carlson put it: "People don't talk to you when
you go out of your way to hurt them as you did." I can't think of any single
dynamic that better explains what has happened the last eight years than
that one.
* * * * *
As for Carlson's snide, self-loving claim that "journalistic standards in
Great Britain are so much dramatically lower than they are here," just watch
this relentlessly probing, adversarial interview
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuqNWG9sbuE&eurl=http://www.salon.com/opinio
n/greenwald/> by the BBC's Jeremy Paxman of John Bolton regarding the Bush
administration's invasion and occupation of Iraq, and ask yourself: how many
American TV reporters would ever dare to conduct an interview of a high Bush
official like this, especially when it's with a Serious Foreign Policy
Expert regarding our being a Nation At War?
Glenn Greenwald writes a regular blog column for Salon.com. His most recent
book is A Tragic Legacy.
C 2008 Salon.com
*
_____
It's Tax Time! Get <http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001>
tips, forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance.
------=_NextPart_000_0072_01C88201.FC5B01E0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" =
xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" =
xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" =
xmlns:st1=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" =
xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
..shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" =
name=3D"country-region"/>
<o:SmartTagType =
namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name=3D"place"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
h2
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:18.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
font-weight:bold;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:720903334;
mso-list-template-ids:-1814545632;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0B7;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=3DEN-US link=3Dblue vlink=3Dblue id=3D"role_body" =
bottomMargin=3D7
leftmargin=3D7 topmargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7>
<div class=3DSection1>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Ugh! Tucker Carlson is one of the =
worse,
fake reporters with a subaltern anti-small d democratic, and =
pro-anarchist,
pro-corporate agenda.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Did anyone catch Jon Stewart giving =
him
the truth which he just could say “duh” =
to?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Check it out, and lets here it for =
growing
real journalists like Amy Goodman, etc.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><a
href=3D"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DaFQFB5YpDZE">http://www.youtube.=
com/watch?v=3DaFQFB5YpDZE</a><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Henry<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>OC Greens / CODO =
Verde<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Orange County Peace =
Action<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div class=3DMsoNormal align=3Dcenter style=3D'text-align:center'><font =
size=3D3
face=3D"Times New Roman"><span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=3D2 width=3D"100%" align=3Dcenter tabindex=3D-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><b><font size=3D2 face=3DTahoma><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font =
size=3D2
face=3DTahoma><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'> =
BDPOE@aol.com
[mailto:BDPOE@aol.com] <br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Saturday, March 08, =
2008
8:29 PM<br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> BDPOE@aol.com<br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> The American =
Press
Liberal?</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 color=3Dblack face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>=
</div>
<div>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 color=3Dblack face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>=
</div>
<div><!-- google_ad_section_start -->
<div align=3Dcenter>
<table class=3DMsoNormalTable border=3D0 cellspacing=3D0 cellpadding=3D0 =
width=3D"85%"
style=3D'width:85.0%'>
<tr>
<td style=3D'padding:0in 0in 0in 0in'>
<div id=3Dpost-7557>
<div>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><em><i><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New =
Roman"><span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>Published on Saturday, March 8, 2008 by =
Salon.com</span></font></i></em>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<h2><b><font size=3D5 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:18.0pt'>Tucker
Carlson Unintentionally Reveals The Role of The American =
Press<o:p></o:p></span></font></b></h2>
<div>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>by Glenn =
Greenwald<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>The
most interesting part of the controversy over Obama advisor Samantha =
Power’s
referring to Hillary Clinton as a “monster” — one =
might say the only
interesting part — is that immediately after Power said it, she =
tried to
proclaim that it was “off the record.” Here was =
Power’s exact quote:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><em><i><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>She
is a monster, too — that is off the record — she is =
stooping to anything.</span></font></i></em><o:p></o:p></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>But the
reporter who was interviewing her, Britain’s Gerri Peev of =
<em><i><font
face=3D"Times New Roman">The Scotsman</font></i></em>, printed the =
comment
anyway — as she should have, because Peev had never agreed that =
any parts of
the interview would be “off the record,” and nobody has =
the right to demand
unilaterally, and after the fact, that journalists keep their =
embarrassing
remarks a secret. It’s extremely likely, though, that had Power =
been speaking
to a typical reporter from the American establishment media, her =
request to
keep her comments a secret would have been honored. In one of the =
ultimate
paradoxes, for American journalists — whose role in theory is to =
<strong><b><font
face=3D"Times New Roman">expose</font></b></strong> the secrets of the =
powerful
— secrecy is actually their central religious tenet, especially =
when it comes
to dealing with the most powerful. Protecting, rather than exposing, =
the
secrets of the powerful is the fuel of American journalism. =
That’s how they
maintain their access to and good relations with those in =
power.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>Illustrating
that point as vividly as anything I can recall, MSNBC’s Tucker =
Carlson had
Peev on his show last night and angrily criticized her publication of =
Power’s
remarks. Carlson upbraided Peev for her lack of deference to someone =
as
important as Power, and Peev retorted by pointing out exactly what =
that
attitude reflects about Carlson and the American press generally (via =
LEXIS;
h/t Mike Stark):<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<blockquote style=3D'margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>CARLSON:
What — she wanted it off the record. Typically, the arrangement =
is if someone
you’re interviewing wants a quote off the record, you give it to =
them off the
record. Why didn’t you do that?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>PEEV: <strong><b><font
face=3D"Times New Roman">Are you really that acquiescent in the =
<st1:country-region
w:st=3D"on"><st1:place w:st=3D"on">United =
States</st1:place></st1:country-region>?</font></b></strong>
In the <st1:country-region w:st=3D"on"><st1:place w:st=3D"on">United =
Kingdom</st1:place></st1:country-region>,
journalists believe that on or off the record is a principle =
that’s decided <strong><b><font
face=3D"Times New Roman">ahead of the interview</font></b></strong>. =
If a figure
in public life.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>CARLSON:
Right.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>PEEV:
Someone who’s ostensibly going to be an advisor to the man who =
could be the
most powerful politician in the world, if she makes a comment and =
decides
it’s a bit too controversial and <strong><b><font face=3D"Times =
New Roman">wants
to withdraw it immediately after, unfortunately if the interview is on =
the
record, it has to go =
ahead</font></b></strong>.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>CARLSON:
Right. Well, it’s a little.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>PEEV: I
didn’t set out in any way, shape.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>CARLSON:
Right. But I mean, since journalistic standards in Great Britain are =
so much
dramatically lower than they are here, it’s a little much being =
lectured on
journalistic ethics by a reporter from the “Scotsman,” but =
I wonder if you
could just explain what you think <strong><b><font face=3D"Times New =
Roman">the
effect is on the relationship between the press and the powerful. =
People
don’t talk to you when you go out of your way to hurt them as =
you did in this
piece. </font></b></strong><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><strong><b><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>Don’t you think that hurts the rest of us in our effort =
to get to the
truth from the principals in these =
campaigns?</span></font></b></strong><o:p></o:p></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>PEEV:
If this is the first time that candid remarks have been published =
about what
one campaign team thinks of the other candidate, then I would argue =
that <strong><b><font
face=3D"Times New Roman">your journalists aren’t doing a very =
good job of
getting to the truth</font></b></strong>. Now I did not go out of my =
way in
any way, shape or form to hurt Miss Power. I believe she’s an =
intelligent and
perfectly affable woman. In fact, she’s — she is =
incredibly intelligent so
she — who knows she may have known what she was =
doing.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>She
regretted it. She probably acted with integrity. It’s not for me =
to decide
one way or the other whether she did the right thing. But I did not go =
out
and try to end her career.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</blockquote>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>Credit
to Tucker Carlson for being so (unintentionally) candid about the =
lowly,
subservient role of the American press with regard to “the =
relationship
between the press and the powerful.” A journalist should never =
do anything
that “hurts” the powerful, otherwise the powerful =
won’t give access to the
press any longer. Presumably, the press should only do things that =
please the
powerful so that the powerful keep talking to the press, so that the =
press in
turn can keep pleasing the powerful, in an endless, symbiotic, =
mutually
beneficial cycle. Rarely does someone who plays the role of a =
“journalist” on
TV so candidly describe their real function. For anyone who wants to =
dismiss
Carlson as some buffoon who is unrepresentative of journalists =
generally, I
would refer them to the testimony at the Lewis Libby trial of the =
mighty,
revered Tim Russert, Washington Bureau Chief for NBC =
News:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><em><i><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>When
I talk to senior government officials on the phone, it’s my own =
policy — our
conversations are confidential. =
</span></font></i></em><strong><b><i><font
face=3D"Times New Roman"><span style=3D'font-style:italic'>If I want =
to use
anything from that conversation, then I will ask =
permission</span></font></i></b></strong><em><i><font
face=3D"Times New Roman">.</font></i></em><o:p></o:p></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>As <em><i><font
face=3D"Times New Roman">The Washington Post</font></i></em>’s =
Dan Froomkin put
it: “That’s not reporting, that’s enabling. =
That’s how you treat your friends
when you’re having an innocent chat, not the people you’re =
supposed to be
holding accountable.” Unlike Carlson, Tim Russert is the Big Guy =
of the
American press corps. He’s the one they all look up to and =
admire, the one
they invariably point to as proof that tough, adversarial journalism =
is alive
and well in the <st1:country-region w:st=3D"on"><st1:place =
w:st=3D"on">U.S.</st1:place></st1:country-region>
Yet that’s the same Tim Russert who admitted under oath that =
— even with no
“off the record” agreement — <strong><b><font =
face=3D"Times New Roman">all of
his conversations with government officials are presumptively =
confidential,
and he never reports anything unless they give him explicit permission =
in
advance to do so.</font></b></strong><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>It’s
the same exact subservient mindset Carlson expressed last night, just =
more
formally and under oath. That’s how the vast majority of them =
think and
behave. As Peev asked in astonishment when Carlson insisted =
Power’s comments
should not have been published because doing “hurtful” =
things like that that
makes the powerful dislike reporters: “Are you really that =
acquiescent in the
<st1:country-region w:st=3D"on"><st1:place w:st=3D"on">United =
States</st1:place></st1:country-region>?”
See the <st1:country-region w:st=3D"on"><st1:place =
w:st=3D"on">Iraq</st1:place></st1:country-region>
War. Or the Bush administration. Or Tim Russert’s operating =
rules.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>I just
had a very similar issue arise last week, and not for the first time. =
In
response to media criticism I wrote, a well-known journalist emailed =
me out
of the blue, unsolicited, with very petulant, whiny objections to what =
I had
written. At the top of his email, he wrote “OFF THE =
RECORD,” and he did the
same with a subsequent exchange. I had never communicated with him =
before and
never agreed to any such arrangement. But that’s a common =
practice among
journalists and many political figures; they think that they can =
unilaterally
slap an “off the record” label on whatever they say and =
expect that it will
be honored.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>I ended
up not publishing that exchange solely because the probative value was
minimal and the primary effect from doing so would just have been to =
make him
look foolish for being so petulant and thin-skinned. Publishing it =
would have
been more vindictive and petty than instructive, so I didn’t. =
But his
unilateral “OFF THE RECORD” designation played no role in =
my decision.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>I
considered publishing it, and I am certain that had I done so, he =
would have
accused me of acting improperly by publishing something he =
unilaterally
decreed to be “OFF THE RECORD.” Just as Russert and =
Carlson said, rampant
secrecy is the coin of their realm, the fuel that greases their =
access.
Nothing should ever be disclosed unless everyone agrees to disclosure =
and it
doesn’t “hurt” the person whose comments are being =
reported.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>The
number one rule of the standard establishment journalist is to avoid
offending the powerful because the more offense they give, the fewer =
favors
the powerful will do for the journalists. Conversely, and by logical
necessity, the more journalists please the powerful, the more favors =
the
powerful will do for them. As Carlson put it: “People =
don’t talk to you when
you go out of your way to hurt them as you did.” I can’t =
think of any single
dynamic that better explains what has happened the last eight years =
than that
one.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>* * * *
*<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>As for
Carlson’s snide, self-loving claim that “journalistic =
standards in Great
Britain are so much dramatically lower than they are here,” just =
watch this<a
=
href=3D"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DRuqNWG9sbuE&eurl=3Dhttp://ww=
w.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/"
target=3D"_blank"> relentlessly probing, adversarial interview</a> by =
the BBC’s
Jeremy Paxman of John Bolton regarding the Bush administration’s =
invasion and
occupation of Iraq, and ask yourself: how many American TV reporters =
would
ever dare to conduct an interview of a high Bush official like this,
especially when it’s with a Serious Foreign Policy Expert =
regarding our being
a Nation At War?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><em><i><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>Glenn
Greenwald writes a regular blog column for Salon.com. His most recent =
book is
A Tragic Legacy.</span></font></i></em><o:p></o:p></p>
<p align=3Dcenter style=3D'text-align:center'><font size=3D3 =
face=3D"Times New Roman"><span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>© 2008 =
Salon.com<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<ul type=3Ddisc>
<li class=3DMsoNormal =
style=3D'mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:
auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New =
Roman"><span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
</div>
<p class=3DMsoNormal style=3D'margin-bottom:12.0pt'><font size=3D3 =
color=3Dblack
face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div class=3DMsoNormal align=3Dcenter =
style=3D'margin-top:7.5pt;text-align:center'><font
size=3D2 color=3Dblack face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;
color:black'>
<hr size=3D2 width=3D"100%" align=3Dcenter>
</span></font></div>
<p class=3DMsoNormal style=3D'margin-top:7.5pt'><font size=3D2 =
color=3Dblack
face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'>It's
Tax Time! <a =
href=3D"http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=3Daolprf00030000000001"
target=3D"_blank" =
title=3D"http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=3Daolprf00030000000001">Get
tips, forms and advice on AOL Money & =
Finance.</a></span></font><font
color=3Dblack face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-family:Arial;color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>
------=_NextPart_000_0072_01C88201.FC5B01E0--