Edward Daley
It aint just a big river in Egypt
By Edward Daley
On the 26th of September, former "Meet the Press" moderator, Marvin Kalb, interviewed Dan (I stick by the story — the story is true) Rather before the National Press Club in a manner which can only be described as shamefully obsequious. During that interview, Kalb remarked "there is absolutely no doubt that journalism was brilliant at the time of 9/11. You were right there in the middle of it — it was brilliant. It really told the American people what was going on. There was no lying. There was no nonsense. And that was certainly true with Katrina. But in between then there was the Iraq War, and in that period of time, many, many people in this country — I don't know about majorities or whatever — I don't go around counting — but many people in this country believe that the journalists sort of held back. They were still so caught up in the patriotism of 9/11 that they allowed the patriotism to dominate their professional instincts."
After hearing this statement, I had to wonder if Mr. Kalb was the only human being in the country who wasn't aware that the New York Times published dozens of consecutive front page articles last year concerning the relatively minor Abu Ghraib abuse story, at the expense of far more important issues. And are we to believe that he remains totally oblivious to the fact that virtually every major news agency in the United States has run hundreds upon hundreds of articles about "insurgents" murdering innocent Iraqis since 2003, while the many positive stories coming out of the region have been largely ignored or downplayed? Exactly what kind of "patriotism" is Mr. Kalb talking about?
Perhaps his idea of a patriotic act is referring to the communist-backed, terrorist sympathizing, anti-war crowd's newest poster child, Cindy (this country is not worth dying for) Sheehan, as the "peace mom." Maybe he thinks that keeping a running count of U.S. war casualties is the media equivalent of waving the American flag, or that repeatedly calling the Iraq War a "unilateral" invasion, in spite of the obvious fact that it wasn't, amounts to singing "I'm a yankee doodle dandy."
As for the Katrina issue, anyone who doesn't think that the "mainstream" media coverage of that disaster was appallingly inaccurate and intentionally sensationalized, especially during its initial phase, needs to set down the crack pipe they're holding and step slowly away. If journalistic objectivity, professionalism, and integrity were hurricanes, the news media wouldn't be able to muster enough wind to jostle Marvin Kalb's hair.
Furthermore, it is my considered opinion that the only reason the passee-press got the 9/11 story right was because of the unprecedented amount of real-time television coverage the event generated. It would have been impossible for anyone to misrepresent what was going on at the time, however, it didn't take long for left-wing extremists to start pointing the finger of blame for the atrocities of that fateful day at America itself, and the "mainstream" news media has been more than happy to shine its "spotlight of truth" on the irresponsible views of hateful con artists like Ward Churchill and Michael Moore ever since.
For someone of Mr. Kalb's credentials to make the sort of preposterous statements he made last Monday, one's conscious mind would have to be cast so deeply into the pit of denial that even Al Gore, who still thinks he won the 2000 election, would need binoculars to see it spiraling out of control beneath him.
It's one thing for a journalist to make an honest mistake — that's only natural, and God knows I've made my share in my capacity as an editorialist — but to turn one's back on the truth, as Marvin Kalb has so clearly done, is nothing short of pathetic. Here's a man who has virtually unlimited access to information, a paid staff of underlings at his disposal, and connections within the highest offices of government, yet reality continues to elude him, just as it has managed to tip-toe by Dan Rather unnoticed.
I may be wrong from time to time, but I never deny the evidence right in front of my eyes, and I promise you that if I could get Dandy Dan in the same room with me for even five minutes, that self-deluded old fart wouldn't walk away with a smile on his face, like he did after talking to Marvin Kalb last week.
Judging by what these two Jurassic Era journalists have said lately — and you really have to listen to the entire interview (provided below) to appreciate just how out of touch with reality these guys are — I find it difficult to believe that they were ever considered to be trustworthy newsmen. Indeed, their mutual renunciation of truths so obvious that even the OJ jury could recognize them, leads me to question their sanity as much as their journalistic competence.
rtsp://video.c-span.org/15days/e092605_rather.rm
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050928-121515-2539r.htm
© Edward Daley
On the 26th of September, former "Meet the Press" moderator, Marvin Kalb, interviewed Dan (I stick by the story — the story is true) Rather before the National Press Club in a manner which can only be described as shamefully obsequious. During that interview, Kalb remarked "there is absolutely no doubt that journalism was brilliant at the time of 9/11. You were right there in the middle of it — it was brilliant. It really told the American people what was going on. There was no lying. There was no nonsense. And that was certainly true with Katrina. But in between then there was the Iraq War, and in that period of time, many, many people in this country — I don't know about majorities or whatever — I don't go around counting — but many people in this country believe that the journalists sort of held back. They were still so caught up in the patriotism of 9/11 that they allowed the patriotism to dominate their professional instincts."
After hearing this statement, I had to wonder if Mr. Kalb was the only human being in the country who wasn't aware that the New York Times published dozens of consecutive front page articles last year concerning the relatively minor Abu Ghraib abuse story, at the expense of far more important issues. And are we to believe that he remains totally oblivious to the fact that virtually every major news agency in the United States has run hundreds upon hundreds of articles about "insurgents" murdering innocent Iraqis since 2003, while the many positive stories coming out of the region have been largely ignored or downplayed? Exactly what kind of "patriotism" is Mr. Kalb talking about?
Perhaps his idea of a patriotic act is referring to the communist-backed, terrorist sympathizing, anti-war crowd's newest poster child, Cindy (this country is not worth dying for) Sheehan, as the "peace mom." Maybe he thinks that keeping a running count of U.S. war casualties is the media equivalent of waving the American flag, or that repeatedly calling the Iraq War a "unilateral" invasion, in spite of the obvious fact that it wasn't, amounts to singing "I'm a yankee doodle dandy."
As for the Katrina issue, anyone who doesn't think that the "mainstream" media coverage of that disaster was appallingly inaccurate and intentionally sensationalized, especially during its initial phase, needs to set down the crack pipe they're holding and step slowly away. If journalistic objectivity, professionalism, and integrity were hurricanes, the news media wouldn't be able to muster enough wind to jostle Marvin Kalb's hair.
Furthermore, it is my considered opinion that the only reason the passee-press got the 9/11 story right was because of the unprecedented amount of real-time television coverage the event generated. It would have been impossible for anyone to misrepresent what was going on at the time, however, it didn't take long for left-wing extremists to start pointing the finger of blame for the atrocities of that fateful day at America itself, and the "mainstream" news media has been more than happy to shine its "spotlight of truth" on the irresponsible views of hateful con artists like Ward Churchill and Michael Moore ever since.
For someone of Mr. Kalb's credentials to make the sort of preposterous statements he made last Monday, one's conscious mind would have to be cast so deeply into the pit of denial that even Al Gore, who still thinks he won the 2000 election, would need binoculars to see it spiraling out of control beneath him.
It's one thing for a journalist to make an honest mistake — that's only natural, and God knows I've made my share in my capacity as an editorialist — but to turn one's back on the truth, as Marvin Kalb has so clearly done, is nothing short of pathetic. Here's a man who has virtually unlimited access to information, a paid staff of underlings at his disposal, and connections within the highest offices of government, yet reality continues to elude him, just as it has managed to tip-toe by Dan Rather unnoticed.
I may be wrong from time to time, but I never deny the evidence right in front of my eyes, and I promise you that if I could get Dandy Dan in the same room with me for even five minutes, that self-deluded old fart wouldn't walk away with a smile on his face, like he did after talking to Marvin Kalb last week.
Judging by what these two Jurassic Era journalists have said lately — and you really have to listen to the entire interview (provided below) to appreciate just how out of touch with reality these guys are — I find it difficult to believe that they were ever considered to be trustworthy newsmen. Indeed, their mutual renunciation of truths so obvious that even the OJ jury could recognize them, leads me to question their sanity as much as their journalistic competence.
rtsp://video.c-span.org/15days/e092605_rather.rm
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050928-121515-2539r.htm
© Edward Daley
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
