An official Daily Howler endorsement!

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2012

Kevin Drum’s Q-and-A on Benghazi: If it’s basic information you want, Kevin Drum presents a good Q-and-A regarding Benghazi.

Just click this.

Regarding the press, CNN’s twenty-minute report last night was truly disgraceful. It had everything, including a muffled report from the New York Times’ David Kirkpatrick, who seems to be scrambling back from the naughty information he put in play this week.

That New York Times! On Tuesday, Kirkpatrick’s report involved new information—new information which tended to support Susan Rice. Result?

Buried on page A6! With a headline which talked about "nuances."

Three days later, Kirkpatrick came up with a report which might make it sound like no one is trying to investigate. Result?

Above the fold on the Times' front page! With snarky headline and hook!

Last night, Kirkpatrick seemed to be playing it safe. He could have clarified or challenged a lot of things that were said.

Didn’t happen.

On the ground in Benghazi, Kirkpatrick reported important new information earlier this week. John King didn’t seem to be interested in letting his viewers know about that.

Instead, he pimped Kirkpatrick’s snarky new piece. A truly grotesque twenty minutes.

7 comments:

  1. No one could have anticipated an attack would take place on 9/11. Clearly a video that sparked protests elsewhere inspired a quick opportunistic "joining in" that was planned that same day. It's also no big deal that terrorists have easy access to diplomats on a moment's notice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "It's also no big deal that terrorists have easy access to diplomats"

      Who said this was all "no big deal?"

      What the hell does "easy access to diplomats" mean, (other, that is, than that you are an abject moron)?

      Delete
    2. ...than that you are an abject moron)?"

      Way to take the high road.

      Delete
  2. Compare today's hard copy NYT (Sat. 10/20/12). Front page, above the fold, a fluff piece on Romney with the headline "Romney Recalled as Leader Who Savors Details." Comes out of Boston. Hey, I've lived in MA for about 35 of my 60+ years. I assure you that any full and fair reporting out of Boston about Romney would not read like this. (There are good reasons Mitt isn't even trying to win in his "home state.")

    Under the fold on the front page, a story out of Washington, "Strategizing for the President, and Her Corporate Clients, Too" (with photo of Obama with David Plouffe and Anita Dunn). To read both stories, you'd come away with the impression that Mitt is a squeaky clean corporate genius, Obama a sleazy corporate conniver.

    When will people stop identifying the NYT as a "liberal" newspaper? As I've noted here in comments before, few self-identifying "liberals" in NYC think of it that way, and for good reason.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where would Somerby's narratives be without the Times, Post, MSNBC, Collins, Dowd, Dionne, et al. categorized as "liberal"?

      Delete
    2. Well, probably lightly read and discussed. Drum has already received far more comments from that one post than Somerby will generate in all of his for the entire week.

      Delete
    3. OOOOOooh!

      Hiss! Spit! Meeeeeooww!!!

      Who knew you were such a catty girl, "irishguy?"

      Delete