BOMBSHELLS INC.: Bombshells R them!

MONDAY, OCTOBER 31, 2016

Part 1—A real bombshell, CNN said:
Last Friday afternoon, the moving finger of James B. Comey—"Comey the God"—wrote a few mysterious words on the latest stone tablet.

His latest pronouncement was remarkably brief. It was also quite vague. As any journalist would have known, the very fact of the pronouncement seemed to fly in the face of certain well-known, established procedures.

Especially when the corps is pretending to conduct campaign discussions, vague pronouncements of this type can produce much more heat than light. A serious journalist would approach such pronouncements with that problem in mind.

On CNN, a "cable news" channel, something quite different occurred. Last Friday, during the 2 PM hour, Brooke Baldwin, a CNN "anchor," had managed to get a leading authority on the phone.

This particular leading authority had written the definitive book! Asked about Comey's pronouncement, he revealed what he had heard:
BALDWIN (10/28/16): On Hillary Clinton, you're looking at live pictures. She is speaking at her rally in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. We have a lot of ears listening in. As soon as she mentions or addresses this breaking news that we've been discussing from the FBI, we will take it live.

Carl Bernstein—Carl Bernstein is on the phone with me.

Carl, we have been talking for months and months and months about the election. You wrote the definitive book on the Clintons, on Hillary Clinton.
You've been saying that this is drip, drip, drip that could ultimately haunt her.

BERNSTEIN: Well, there's no question that the emails have always been the greatest threat to her candidacy for president, that her conduct in regard to the emails is really indefensible. And if there was going to be more information that came out, it was the one thing, as I said on the air last night, actually, that could really perhaps affect this election.

We don't know what this means yet except that it's a real bombshell. And it is unthinkable that the director of the FBI would take would action lightly, that he would put this letter forth to the Congress of the United States saying there is more information out there about classified e-mails and call it to the attention of Congress unless it was something requiring serious investigation. So that's where we are.

Is it a certainty that we won't learn before the election? I'm not sure it's a certainty we won't learn before the election. One is it's possible that Hillary Clinton might want to, on her own initiative, talk to the FBI and find out what she can, and, if she chooses to, let the American people know what she thinks or knows is going on. Because obviously, people need to hear from her.
Both parts of that exchange help define our floundering journalistic/political culture. Let's start with what the person cast as the anchor said.

The anchor told her viewers that we had some "breaking news." More precisely, we had "breaking news that we've been discussing from the FBI."

Among those who people our "cable news" channels, "breaking news" qualifies as one of the greatest gods. In response to this breaking news, the anchor had contacted a leading authority.

According to the person cast as the anchor, Carl Bernstein had written "the definitive book on the Clintons, on Hillary Clinton." As such, he was now cast as the voice of authority concerning these words from the god.

What did Bernstein, the voice of authority, say about the breaking news from the FBI?

Bernstein had several things to say. He instantly condemned the candidate's past behavior. But more than anything else, he said the new words from James B. Comey constituted a "bombshell."

Indeed, it was even more exciting than that! James B. Comey's latest words were "a real bombshell," he said.

Already, we'd seen a basic component of the industry which markets itself as "cable news." Excitement is their product—arguably their only product.

Quite routinely, the excitement arrives in the form of "breaking news"—"breaking news" which may, in certain cases, qualify as a "bombshell."

In these ways, the purveyors tell us that something exciting has occurred. That tell us that something exciting has happened, and that it's very important.

Please keep watching, these pronouncements say. Help us maintain the ratings from which our undisclosed, huge salaries flow.

Excitedly, the man who wrote the definitive book had announced a real bombshell. Now, he enacted another part of the culture of "cable news."

He bowed to one of the industry's gods. Crazily, here's what he said:

"It is unthinkable that the director of the FBI would take would action lightly, that he would put this letter forth to the Congress of the United States saying there is more information out there about classified emails and call it to the attention of Congress unless it was something requiring serious investigation. So that's where we are."

It's "unthinkable" that Comey isn't a god. So the leading authority said. He proceeded to offer ridiculous thoughts about what Candidate Clinton might do.

"Obviously, people need to hear from her," he excitedly said.

Let's state the obvious. This latest pronouncement by Comey the God may tip the presidential election.

Inevitably, some votes will change. There's no way to know how many.

At this late date, there's little way to affect that. That said, this latest pronouncement helps us see the way our establishment "press corps" works, especially in its cable and broadcast divisions. It helps us see the essence of modern press corps culture.

For starters, it lets us see how non-journalistic our press corps' instincts are. It lets us see their reliable instinct to seek the heat, not the light.

It lets us see their instinct for the illusion of excitement. You might even say it lets us see their secret corporate identity.

Truly, cable news is Bombshells Inc.! They're a group of silly purveyors who like to sell us breaking news—"explosive" news which sometimes reaches the level of being a "bombshell."

Not everything will qualify as a "bombshell," of course. As the week continues, we'll examine that point, and other parts of press corps culture which emerged from Friday's pronouncement.

We'll see that they're also Scandals Inc.; we'll see what counts as "scandal." We'll see they're Straight-Shooters Inc. We'll see who gets cast as the straight-shooters in the exciting stories they tell.

(Hint: Comey has long been cast in that manner. It's this casting which made him a god.)

Sadly but unmistakably, we'll see that one branch of the industry is Pseudo-liberals Inc. We'll review the ways our favorite liberals have hid in the woods, for twenty-fives years, in the face of this growing press culture. We'll remember the roads they didn't take, the truths they agreed not to tell.

(We'll recall what happened when You-Know-Who got to interview Colin Powell. We'll recall what our favorites did when Benghazi was being invented.

(We'll recall the way You-Know-Who mugged and clowned after Trump's formal announcement. We'll revisit the word The Puppy used when the New York Times published its ludicrous, 4400-word report about the scary uranium deal.

(Gack! It was a "bombshell," he said.)

We'll review these topics this week. For today, let's start with a basic point:

Especially on "cable news," our modern "press corps" is Bombshells Inc. The product they sell is excitement, though a great deal of sifting goes on.

Friday, as the excitement grew, an array of purveyors on CNN pimped the latest example. As of the 5 PM hour, Wolf was calling it an "October bombshell," fashioning an instant hybrid with the exciting "October surprise."

Comey's words had been extremely vague. As all these purveyors knew, the fact that he had spoken at all seemed to diverge from well-known, long-standing procedures.

A journalist would have gone in search of the light, cautioning viewers about all the heat. Excitedly, Bernstein took a different approach. He announced "a real bombshell."

There's no way Comey wasn't sincere, the strange alleged journalist said.

Tomorrow: Two essential products

Teasing the excitement: The anchor has Bernstein on the phone! Before taking a commercial break, she teased the upcoming interview thusly:
BALDWIN: Coming up next, we're staying on the breaking story, the news from the FBI. We'll talk live with Carl Bernstein. This man literally wrote the biography on Hillary Clinton. We've been talking to him for months. He's been predicting this trouble all along.
The excitement was running high. Carl Bernstein, who literally wrote the biography, had been predicting this trouble all along!

That wasn't true, of course. But cable news is all about excitement. It's also Predictions Inc.

20 comments:

  1. Comey should have known that Trump would make hay with his letter and that the press would treat it as a bombshell no matter how carefully he worded it.

    On MSNBC this morning, Stephanie Rule called the complaints about Comey "damage control," as if Clinton were trying to manage another scandal that she created. There has been no suggestion that this is a partisan attack against Clinton manufactured by her political enemies to slow down her campaign. With all the endless talking on cable news, there is no discussion of that interpretation whatsoever! And yet that would be a bombshell, wouldn't it?

    No one conducts any sort of business these days without using email. We're supposed to believe that the very existence of emails on a server belonging to a Clinton aide constitutes malfeasance.

    Why does no one actively defend Hillary Clinton from obvious attacks?

    Trump is telling his voters to vote twice because their first votes are being destroyed or changed at the polls (or by postal workers). Why isn't that a bombshell?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Comey "should have" known Trump would make hay?

      Comey "should have known," in short, that he was taking action that would likely prejudice the election, action quite clearly going against long-standing policy, action explicitly against the immediate advice of the Justice Department (AKA his boss), action very likely against the law of the land (the Hatch Act).

      Comey "should have" known?

      In what universe could we believe that he did not know?

      The man should have been fired in July, following his egregious press conference, a charade which transgressed many sensible norms itself.

      Delete
  2. NY Times' Thomas Friedman cut through all the spin and obfuscation regarding Hillary's e-mails:

    But let me say this: Hillary Clinton has no one else to blame but herself. Why in the world did she do this incredibly stupid thing?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What "incredibly stupid thing" did she do? Use a non-government server for her e-mail, just like her predecessor had done? Why is that regarded as so "incredibly stupid"?

      Delete
    2. Jonny -- She handled her e-mails differently from her her predecessor. Here are a few differences that come to mind:
      -- She disobeyed specific instructions from the White House to use a government server.
      -- She put all her e-mails on a private server.
      -- She didn't archive the government-related e-mails with the government, as required, when she left the State Dept.
      -- She (apparently) allowed classified e-mails to go to people without appropriate clearance
      -- She took pains to make her e-mails unavailable to invesigators, by stripping her computer and physically destroying the hard disc.

      Delete
    3. Her foolishness was in failing to be prescient and recognize how this would be used against her by political enemies. If it was stupid for her, it was stupid for George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, all of the previous Secretaries of State, various other cabinet members and government officials. This was common practice, not something she did that others did not.

      You keep lying about what happened. You have been contradicted, with sources cited, on numerous occasions. Please take this somewhere else.

      Delete
    4. Trump supporters believe that Clinton sent classified emails and they think everything in Wikileaks is true -- no possibility any of it was altered by the hackers. These are articles of faith.

      Delete
    5. So far, nothing in wikileaks has proved to be false. So wikileaks has proved to be more trustworthy than our next President, regardless of whether it's Donald or Hillary.

      Delete
    6. Nothing in WikiLeaks has been compared to the original emails in Podesta's account. You have no way of knowing whether any of the messages have been changed or not.

      Delete
    7. David in Cal, getting in bed with Putin and the Russian mafia.

      Greed => treason.

      Delete
  3. Bernstein did make a fool out of himself, but he's an "old school" guy who naively believes the head of the FBI has "honor."

    Of course, today, who isn't a political hack?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are degrees of hackiness. Kasich seems to be less of a hack than Christie, for example.

      Delete
    2. In the end he still is a Republican whore to big money. Just a little more refined.

      Delete
  4. Under what possible set of standards are these news orgs reporting this story and the WikiLeaks stories? Is the idea of two sources quaint?

    ReplyDelete
  5. What is different these days about the latest CLINTON did ______ in ______gate is the playbook is the same as in the 1990s but there was no web, no blogs, no EMAIL ;-) Those of us who remember the "two newspaper" town and the so called FAIRNESS doctrine were conditioned to weigh both sides and draw a conclusion. Actually, Bernstein proves the mirage of so called "straight news" from those good old days until now. It is cynical to denigrate the entire 'librul media' or call CNN 'clinton news net'. Fox News is terrible, but as the analysts at Howler World HQ allude to, MSNBC has its terrible moments too, and NOT JUST mourning jo.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well, at least Woodward is still around to make him look good. Literally.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Getting ex back, Me and my boyfriend were together for 8 months & its been 6 months since we separated. I still love him, but some how feel its unfair. Why love someone who ovb doesnt love you back? Ive prayed & prayed for these months & nothing. He is still with his new girlfriend(whom he lives with) but it doesnt mean I have to look for help The first weeks after the break up I was in my knees praying looking for help, them i fine a comment online how a spell caster help to restored relationship get ex lover back, ” so i decided to give a try coz i love my boyfriend so much. so i contacted Dr happy tell him all my problem and he gave me 100%guarantee that i will have my boyfriend back after the spell so i was gifted and lucky to have contacted him i did every thing he ask of me and to my greatest surprise a day after the spell my boyfriend call me and apology for what he did to me and ask for my forgiveness to come back home for me, I get really hurt & go through those moments in which he left me after all Dr happy did for me, i forgive him and he come back home with more love and happiness all thanks to Dr happy the real Africa spell caster who help to bring ex lover back, restored broken relationship and marriage. plz if you need any help contact him on happylovespell2@gmail.com. You see in conclusion you have to just trust the process, Dr happy is a good real spell caster so call him or add him on whats-app +2348133873774 Jennifer Marian Base in Texas Usa

    ReplyDelete
  8. Getting back your husband after a divorce, break up. My husband and I have been through every top reason for divorce; financial struggles, bankruptcy, stressful jobs, becoming parents when we weren’t ready (neither one of us would give our kids back just the amount of stress is overwhelming) we fought ALL the time over anything and everything. I threatened divorce all the time. One day after a fight I said I was done and filling. He told me he wasn’t in love with me anymore. After a day or two of cooling off I realized that divorce is not what I wanted. No, our marriage was not healthy but we had so much going against us an neither one of us were trying. I begged for him to forgive me and that I didn’t mean it. He told me he loved me but wasn’t in love with me anymore. Those words hurt and I believed him. After a month or two he also backed out of the divorce and didn’t want to leave me. We also saw THREE different couples counselors who did not help us at all. (Maybe just bad luck) we still have our moments but not as bad as before. We BOTH read a book called “Love and Respect” by Dr. happy Eggerichs and his web site saved our marriage.coz i read a great testimony of him that he help many to fight against their divorce marriage and broken relationship so i email him straight ahead at happylovespell2@gmail.com and explain the fight between me and my husband, so he gave me assurance and guarantee that my husband will come back again and forgive me just 2 days after the spell. so that was how Dr happy help me out on my divorce problem with my husband he is really good and real man of his words plz if you need any help like my, advise goes to Dr happy at happylovespell2@gmail.com, call or add him on whats-app +2348133873774. thanks am Jewel Carol from New jersey Usa

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hello Every One Out Here
    I'm DANIEL CRAIG. I'm From UNITED KINGDOM. I really want to tell the whole world what Dr. Iyaryi greatest spell caster done for me this is tears of joy. My wife left to USA last eight months and there after she refused to come home i called and i called and she persisted then instantly i knew something was wrong somewhere i searched for helped from the vertical to horizontal and yet to no avail. I cried and cried but she was not going to come back to me, i keep a search on internet to get suggestions from anywhere that i can then contact and i came across a testimony relating to my case with this email (driayaryi2012@hotmail.com) but to say the fact though i wanted to do anything to have my wife back i still have doubt that this couldn't work cause i don't believe in superstition but i just put a trial by emailing the (driayaryi2012@hotmail.com) The reply i got was striking that my wife had been spellbound by another man, i screamed help but he said not worry and instruct me what to do and i did exactly as i was instructed. to my greatest surprise two days later my wife called and she was crying to me and not knowing what to do i bust into tears too but it was a tears of joy. so i will use this medium to urge every single soul with problem of any kind to try and contact this email. (driayaryi2012@hotmail.com) Dr. Iyaryi is a solution provider.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hello Every One
    ANGEL PAULINA, I'm From UK. I just wanted to express my gratitude and appreciation to Dr. Ogbefi for bringing my husband back to me,I was married to my husband for 4 years and all of a sudden he started seeing another lady (his mistress).he started hailing at me and he was abusive.. and he hated me , but I still loved him with all my heart . the situation made me unsettle and not to focus at work .so a friend told me about trying (Dr. Ogbefi)spiritual means to get my husband back and introduced me to him ? i did not listen to her and hoped that my husband will come back home . after 9 month of separation and depression , it got out of hand and my husband came back home to break the news to me that he want a divorce that he is getting married to his mistress .Hmm it was so shocking to me ,i felt sad and more depressed ,so i contacted my friend again and decided to try to use spiritual means reluctantly..although I didn't believe in all those things? I never thought in a million years that i will get my husband back to me a again.it I was proved wrong.after 24 hours, my husband came back and was pleading..he had realised his mistakes..i just couldn't believe it that we are back together. I am deeply satisfied and thankful with Dr. Ogbefi work .if you also want to fix you marriage or relationship email him at (solutionoflovespelltemple@hotmail.com) And also Reach him on WhatsApp Number: +2348056932763 Thanks Dr. Ogbefi

    ReplyDelete