James O'Keefe Scores Another Hit

On the New York Times, Jay Rosen, and Clay Shirky.

Rosen and Shirkey are professors of journalism at New York University. O'Keefe made what appears to be an undercover video of a classroom setting. Rosen and Shirky are openly discussing the New York Times strategy to legitimize President Obama during the 2008 campaign, their strategy to help Occupy Wall Street, tax loopholes for NPR, their unwillingness to cover Michelle Bachmann, and a strategy to generate revenue for the Times that involves disparaging conservatives.

The most striking thing about this is the lack of any ethical consideration whatsoever. And the hubris.

Lot of Good Stuff In Here... [ace]: Clay Shirky discusses the issue of bias in coverage, and how it's done.

Regarding Obama in 2006 and 2007, he notes -- at this point in time, at least -- there really was no very credible reason to cover Obama seriously. He was a little-known very inexperienced freshman Senator. And black. The odds of him becoming President were less than 100:1.

And yet the Times realized (correctly) that he could be a viable candidate. But that itself is not supposed to be news; that is, the Times can't "create the news" with a headline like:

Thirty Out of Thirty-Two New York Times Editors Agree: Obama Would Be A Good Democratic Candidate

Now that's actually what they want to say. That is, in fact, the news: that a major influence-leading liberal news organization is impressed by a liberal politician (and so of course will be giving him favorable coverage in the future).

But they can't say that, because supposedly they're not liberal (wink) and because they are supposed to report the news made by others, not report the "news" of their own beliefs and opinions.

So what do they do? They begin covering stuff like Obama Girl, noting the cultural phenomenon of Barack Obama (which wasn't really a phenomenon when they began treating it as such). Without expressly running a story with the headline, Reliably Left-Liberal News Organization Has Decided To Give Barack Obama Favorable Coverage Because They Like Him, that was in fact what was going on, as evidenced by their choice to elevate a little-known freshman Senator into Someone You The Reader Should Be Taking Seriously Because All These Smart People (Not Us!) Are Taking Him Seriously.

It's an interesting observation by Shirky, and undoubtedly true.

Later in the video he discusses the opposite of that -- the Times' decision to not bless Michele Bachmann with Serious Candidate Coverage.

I can't say I disagree with their opinion on that, but then, I'm an opinion writer. I can say "She's not serious." The NYT is supposed to not show that sort of editorial bias in its straight news stories.

At 7:27 begins the most damning stuff. Among the statements (admissions contrary to evidence) Shirky makes are:

1. Most people can't tell their hometown newspaper is super liberal because 95% of the country has only one hometown newspaper and ergo have no basis for comparison. (He seems about 50 years behind the Times on this -- most people have FoxNews now.)

2. The media's business model relies upon the deception that they are unbiased. So while they freely admit their liberal biases among "other elites," they will not admit this to the public. Because (per admission 1), I think he means that the sales pitch of the media -- we give it to you straight and unbiased -- is in fact still fairly effective, due to the prevalence of one-newspaper towns, and thus media liberals would be diminishing their influence and their business reach by confessing this.

He goes on to crow how everyone in the room are all "elites," to which NYU professor of "journalism" Jay Rosen jokes, "We are the one percent!"

But that's a joke like many things are jokes -- a difficult, tendentious admission is confessed to in a jokey format, to lessen the impact.

Good video. Shirky adds a little something to my understanding of bias with his explanation of how the NYT communicated what shied away from communicating expressly (i.e., "We at the NYT are gay for Obama!!!").

Although Shirky is himself a liberal, and a big NYT booster, he's adept at explaining how media bias is actually practiced.

And, as they say in the law, this is admissible in court as Statements Against Interest.

(They actually sit around and refer to themselves and their readers as elites. Good grief. Bask in the warm rays of glorious self-regard, dude.)

Thanks to guest blogger Jammie Wearing Fool for the tip.

Follow me on Twitter.

Posted by: rdbrewer at 03:06 PM



Comments

1 They may be elites, but they are unworthy elites.

I say this many times, you have no idea how stupid most of your professors are.

Posted by: AmishDude at October 27, 2011 03:08 PM (T0NGe)

2 Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at October 27, 2011 03:09 PM (8y9MW)

3 I'm shocked...sorry, guys. Can't summon the feignd outrage.

Posted by: Captain Renault at October 27, 2011 03:10 PM (O6q63)

4
It's not just a game to these people.

It's a deadly game.

Posted by: Soothsayer at October 27, 2011 03:10 PM (sqkOB)

5 It's my nature.

Posted by: the scorpion at October 27, 2011 03:11 PM (IfkGz)

6 25th percentile of their graduating classes. Damn right they're elites!

Posted by: somebody else, not me at October 27, 2011 03:11 PM (7EV/g)

7 I say this many times, you have no idea how stupid most of your professors are.
Oh, I left a university teaching post 5 years ago. I know EXACTLY how stupid they are.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at October 27, 2011 03:12 PM (sbV1u)

8 What the fuck is a newspaper?

Posted by: Shtetl G at October 27, 2011 03:12 PM (VGIcl)

9 Thank Gaia. I thought I was a conspiracy nut for sure.

Posted by: Cherry pi at October 27, 2011 03:12 PM (OhYCU)

10 6
25th percentile of their graduating classes. Damn right they're elites!

Posted by: somebody else, not me at October 27, 2011 03:11 PM (7EV/g)
If I were to have a full-frontal lobotomy......the piece of my brain that they take out......could be left in the sun for a week......partially eaten by squirrels......could still get a Ph.D. in journalism.

Posted by: AmishDude at October 27, 2011 03:13 PM (T0NGe)

11 8
What the fuck is a newspaper?


Posted by: Shtetl G at October 27, 2011 03:12 PM (VGIcl)
Yes, can't we fold the journalism department into the department of buggy whip engineering.

Posted by: AmishDude at October 27, 2011 03:13 PM (T0NGe)

12 I have used coffee grounds that have passed a few journalism classes.

Posted by: AmishDude at October 27, 2011 03:14 PM (T0NGe)

13 I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!

Posted by: Capt. Renault at October 27, 2011 03:14 PM (QKKT0)

14 I left my lunch in the journalism department one day and they gave the baloney sandwich tenure.

Posted by: AmishDude at October 27, 2011 03:15 PM (T0NGe)

15 Take away the state media's 15 point influence in 2008, a year with incredible Democrat headwinds, and John McCain wins the popular vote by 61-38 margin...

Posted by: 18-1 at October 27, 2011 03:15 PM (7BU4a)

16 Please stop referring to our multi racial but self proclaimed "African American" as "black". By doing so you enable the use of the race card.

Posted by: Avi at October 27, 2011 03:15 PM (Gx3Fe)

17
They don't report the news.

They make the news.

Posted by: Soothsayer at October 27, 2011 03:15 PM (sqkOB)

18 3
I'm shocked...sorry, guys. Can't summon the feignd outrage.

Posted by: Captain Renault at October 27, 2011 03:10 PM (O6q63)

Crap. I though if I hit it by # 25, nobody would have beat me to it.

Posted by: Capt. Renault at October 27, 2011 03:15 PM (QKKT0)

19
Kinda like how we're not in a recovery.

But Obama decrees that we're in a recovery.

Posted by: Soothsayer at October 27, 2011 03:16 PM (sqkOB)

20 As the T-Rexes sit around making jokes about how they got it all over the Triceratopses, cue the asteroid...

Posted by: Idaho Spudboy at October 27, 2011 03:17 PM (1+CnU)

21
Barack Hussein Obama

Our uni-lingual president.

Posted by: Soothsayer at October 27, 2011 03:17 PM (sqkOB)

22 If a tree falls in the liberal forest, but the media refuses to cover it, has it, in fact, fallen?

Posted by: nickless at October 27, 2011 03:17 PM (MMC8r)

23 Liberals suck.

Posted by: © Sponge at October 27, 2011 03:18 PM (UK9cE)

24 This is AWESOME!!!!!!!!! And, frankly, scary, how these bozos promoted SCOAMF and got him elected.

Posted by: Beckster at October 27, 2011 03:18 PM (VjJAc)

25 This feels a little like overhearing the guy who raped your sister laughing about it with his friends.

Posted by: Shiggz undecided - weighing pros-cons-balls at October 27, 2011 03:18 PM (I9fXA)

26
Every single point of Obama's 160 IQ is channeled into focus on jobs, jobs, jobs.

Oh wait, no it isn't.

Posted by: Soothsayer at October 27, 2011 03:18 PM (sqkOB)

27 The NYT and the MFM are biased toward SCOAMF...
And this just in: Water is wet!

Posted by: jorn-O-list at October 27, 2011 03:18 PM (BkQvr)

28 All The News That Fits Our Agenda

Posted by: The New York Times at October 27, 2011 03:18 PM (QKKT0)

29 They covered Obama as if he were a celebrity. No serious analysis of policy positions and background (boooooorring) just puff piecesand "he's socool" valentines. That worked out well.

Posted by: AMartel at October 27, 2011 03:19 PM (1Bqk7)

30
Take off your slippers!
Put on your marching shoes!

Posted by: Soothsayer at October 27, 2011 03:19 PM (sqkOB)

31
I speak Austrian.

Posted by: Soothsayer at October 27, 2011 03:19 PM (sqkOB)

32 Crap. I though if I hit it by # 25, nobody would have beat me to it.
Posted by: Capt. Renault at October 27, 2011 03:15 PM
Don't sweat it.

Posted by: Claude Raines at October 27, 2011 03:21 PM (O6q63)

33 Yep, I'm in a one-newspaper town, and the newspaper is liberal. And when you blog about local stuff from a conservative angle, they go nuts, like it was just the ugliest thing ever. Because they know the people, and it's a small town, so you're supposed to play nice and act like there is nothing ideological about it.

BS I say. Even potholes - yes potholes - are political, if your govt doesn't have enough money to fix them because they pissed it away on toys and new planning office hires.

Posted by: jeanne! at October 27, 2011 03:21 PM (GdalM)

34 The Fourth Estate is a Fifth Column.

Posted by: nickless at October 27, 2011 03:21 PM (MMC8r)

35 But..but...FAUX NEWS!

Posted by: Lauren at October 27, 2011 03:21 PM (VKD8C)

36 Couple comments:

I find interesting his comments re Bachman
saying crazy things and being unelectable, yet treated as a viable
candidate by NYT, but then also saying the NYT's minimal coverage of
Obama (who had his share of crazy statements associations) helped
Obama's campaign.


I don't know if this is just willful blindness to the popular
opinion strategy at play, or if some of the context was lost explaining
exactly how the NYT helped drive the unelectable (100-1) candidate on the left to the WH by sparing coverage.


That he seems perplexed at the coverage of Bachman suggests to me
that he himself is a victim of the propaganda. The NYT pushing an
unelectable candidate on the right allows the best possible outcome for
their candidate of choice on the left.


Surprises me that he doesn't get that strategy.

Second: I'm
left a little concerned about the overall missing context. O'Keefe has
come through time and again after the fact with filling in the context
the left claims was left out and changes things, but I can imagine a
whole lot of context that would make a lot of this seem pretty
innocuous.

Posted by: krakatoa at October 27, 2011 03:22 PM (bbJJG)

37 $50,000 a year for 4 years will get you a shiny new degree in journalism.. and a spot in Zucotti park!

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 27, 2011 03:22 PM (f9c2L)

38 Every single point of Obama's 160 IQ is channeled into focus on jobs, jobs, jobs.

No complaints here.

Posted by: Kal Penn at October 27, 2011 03:22 PM (7BU4a)

39
Here's what we'll do.

We'll tell people how everyone thinks Obama is really smart.

Posted by: New York Times at October 27, 2011 03:22 PM (sqkOB)

40 But FOX NEWS!

Posted by: Sterling Archer at October 27, 2011 03:22 PM (1H47k)

41 Do whatever you want to do.

Posted by: rdbrewer at October 27, 2011 03:23 PM (1DJgI)

42 Hey.

Do whatever you want to do. While I slowly seethe with anger.

Posted by: Jay Rosen at October 27, 2011 03:23 PM (1DJgI)

43 There's an old cliche' out there about the "amazing thing about the dancing bear". In this case the amazing thinsg is the idiots think they still control the narrative, especially in the 1 paper towns. As you said ace, this guy is sharp, but he is 50 years behind. That comes from being insulated in downtown NYC. The biggest factor isn't Fox news either. The biggest factor is availability of the internet and talk radio.

And that is why the Dems are working so damn hard to get some type of fairness doctrine back which is what FDR used to shutdown the opposition press. They are coming up with multiple programs all different names, but all designed to control these mediums.

But that only happens in 3rd world dictatorships, right?

Posted by: Vic at October 27, 2011 03:23 PM (YdQQY)

44 Jeremiah Wright WHO?

Hey, look at Perry's ROCK!

Posted by: The MSM at October 27, 2011 03:23 PM (MMC8r)

45 DO. WHATEVER. YOU WANT. TO DO.

Posted by: Jay Rosen at October 27, 2011 03:24 PM (1DJgI)

46 NPR sacked their reporter caught helping organize OWS the NYT did not. I won't say NPR has more credibility but I will say they have less *negative* credibility than NYT.

Posted by: Bob Saget at October 27, 2011 03:24 PM (SDkq3)

47 Anybody else notice the Shenanigans with





O6q63





QKKT0

Posted by: Shiggz undecided - weighing pros-cons-balls at October 27, 2011 03:25 PM (I9fXA)

48 He was a little-known very inexperienced freshman Senator. And black.
The odds of him becoming President were less than 100:1.

By the way, this bothers the hell out of me.

He was nominated totally because and elected partially because he is black.

It's a huge net benefit and I don't see any evidence whatsoever that his race hurt him with anyone. Indeed, it only helps him.

It is only in the noblesse oblige condescending Left that they can't get rid of the meme that black candidates are less electable. They are more electable, by leaps and bounds more electable.

Posted by: AmishDude at October 27, 2011 03:25 PM (T0NGe)

49
Obama is really popular, we'll tell them.

World leaders love Obama, we'll say.

Posted by: New York Times at October 27, 2011 03:25 PM (sqkOB)

50 What a bunch of smug arrogant asshats.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at October 27, 2011 03:25 PM (1Jaio)

51
And his wife. Oh boy, we'll sell the shit out of her!

Michelle is beautiful, we'll say.

Posted by: New York Times at October 27, 2011 03:25 PM (sqkOB)

52 So, what flashed through professor Rosen's mind when he heard it was James O'Keefe on the other end?? Ahahahahahaha

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 27, 2011 03:26 PM (f9c2L)

53 Fox News is fully on board with e.g. the "The Republicans control Congress" meme from the earlier thread. There is no alternative media outside of the Internet now.

Posted by: Ian S. at October 27, 2011 03:26 PM (tqwMN)

54 OT: schiff round two is out

Posted by: Cherry pi at October 27, 2011 03:26 PM (OhYCU)

55 "DO. WHATEVER. YOU WANT. TO DO."

Translated:

"DO, you f!cker. WHATEVER, you f!ck f!ck f!cker. YOU WANT, f!ckity f!ck f!ck f!cker f!ck. TO DO, dammit f!cking f!ck f!cker, you f!cker."

Posted by: rdbrewer at October 27, 2011 03:27 PM (1DJgI)

56 OT here but how many of you that are competitive haven't wanted to do this at some point?

Posted by: laceyunderalls at October 27, 2011 03:27 PM (OZfNl)

57 Fox News is fully on board with e.g. the "The Republicans control
Congress" meme from the earlier thread. There is no alternative media
outside of the Internet now.

Dang. I may actually have to start a blog. I wouldn't be very good at it, and it would mostly point to other sites, but we need as many voices (Insty's proverbial "Army of Davids") as possible.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at October 27, 2011 03:27 PM (8y9MW)

58 I disagree with the assessment that theres a lotta good stuff in there. I would say that there is a lot of maggot infested treasonous shit in there. And a rope and a street lamp should be in their futures.

Posted by: Do I know you? at October 27, 2011 03:27 PM (OlN4e)

59
jayrosen_nyu Jay RosenI'm at O'Hare now, switching planes. Later today I will have a statement about James O'Keefe's attempted "sting" against me and Clay Shirky.2 hours ago



"BRB - defecting to Cuba..."

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at October 27, 2011 03:27 PM (oBrVT)

60 51

And his wife. Oh boy, we'll sell the shit out of her!

Michelle is beautiful, we'll say.


Posted by: New York Times at October 27, 2011 03:25 PM (sqkOB)
That one they couldn't sell. You got a few weeks of the Empress' New Clothes schtick, but chicks know fashion.

Posted by: AmishDude at October 27, 2011 03:27 PM (T0NGe)

61 OT here but how many of you that are competitive haven't wanted to do this at some point?

I refuse to play Monopoly because my brother cheated every single time we played when we were kids. WTF? He had to cheat to beat an 8 year old?

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at October 27, 2011 03:28 PM (8y9MW)

62 O'Keefe, you magnificent bastard!

Posted by: Matt at October 27, 2011 03:29 PM (90w0O)

63

Is it ok to say these guys are total assholes?

I think it is.

In fact, I'm sure they'd get a gleam in their eyes were they to be called assholes, because assholes like these assholes, get thrills on pissing people off and being all nasty, and catty and shit.


Posted by: Rev Dr E Buzz Racism Identifier at October 27, 2011 03:29 PM (tcSZb)

64 jayrosen_nyu Jay RosenI'm
at O'Hare now, switching planes. Later today I will have a statement
about James O'Keefe's attempted "sting" against me and Clay Shirky.

The forecast is...whining, with a 90% chance of blaming the messenger.

Posted by: AmishDude at October 27, 2011 03:29 PM (T0NGe)

65 @52 I had caught the same hilarious moment. Funny how he knows exactly who James O'keefe is, you could here the restrained venom and worry in his voice.

Posted by: Shiggz undecided - weighing pros-cons-balls at October 27, 2011 03:29 PM (I9fXA)

66 And the hubris.

It's always the hubris.

Posted by: dfbaskwill at October 27, 2011 03:29 PM (ndlFj)

67 Clay Shirky is a bit off- the media was covering Obama disproportionately as early as 2004.

Jonathan Alter is the author of two New York Times best-sellers, The Promise: President Obama, Year One and The Defining Moment: FDR’s Hundred Days and the Triumph of Hope and a weekly columnist for the Bloomberg View.
Before Bloomberg View, Alter spent 28 years as a correspondent, editor and columnist for Newsweek where he covered seven presidential elections and authored more than 50 cover stories. He frequently interviews American presidents and other world leaders, regularly breaks news, and has written extensively over the years about politics, media, education, terrorism, anti-Semitism, at-risk children, national service and a wide variety of other issues. In 2004, Alter wrote the first cover story on Obama in a national magazine, one of several he has authored on the president.-

Posted by: tasker at October 27, 2011 03:29 PM (rJVPU)

68
What's this?

Rosen is gearing up for his "I was taken out of context" piece?

Those words I said? Yeah, that's not what I meant.

Posted by: soothsayer at October 27, 2011 03:30 PM (sqkOB)

69 That one they couldn't sell. You got a few weeks of the Empress' New Clothes schtick, but chicks know fashion.

Not true. There are multiple internet sites devoted to fans of Moochelle's fashion and style (mrs-o.com being the most famous) and they're deadly serious.

Posted by: Ian S. at October 27, 2011 03:31 PM (tqwMN)

70
Is Jay Rosen gonna try to Governor Perdue himself out of this?

It was all a joke?

Posted by: soothsayer at October 27, 2011 03:31 PM (sqkOB)

71 I think at the tie Jonathan Adler was working for Newsweek.

Posted by: tasker at October 27, 2011 03:31 PM (rJVPU)

72 Shut up, everyone! Let's listen to what Ron Paul has to say. I mean, he's the man.

Posted by: Soona - stocking up on ammo at October 27, 2011 03:31 PM (y0bJs)

73 Posted by: Soothsayer at October 27, 2011 03:18 PM (sqkOB)

Check your numbers SS, I think you may have gotten hold of Obama's golf score for 18 holes by mistake.

Posted by: Lawrence of the Labia at October 27, 2011 03:32 PM (bdGWv)

74
I've made this point point before.... but its worth repeating.


It is not bias if it's a deliberate and conscious action.

Posted by: fixerupper at October 27, 2011 03:32 PM (C8hzL)

75 51 And his wife. Oh boy, we'll sell the shit out of her!Michelle is beautiful, we'll say.
Posted by: New York Times at October 27, 2011 03:25 PM (sqkOB) ------
"I am Camelot...with a tan" ~Michelle in New Yorker article (iirc)
I wonder who told her to say that.

Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 27, 2011 03:32 PM (esyI3)

76 He had to cheat to beat an 8 year old?

I cheated all the time when I was a kid if I could get away with it. The 'rents turned that around quickly though -- didn't want me to grow up to be little Democrat.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at October 27, 2011 03:33 PM (OZfNl)

77 He had to cheat to beat an 8 year old?

Monopoly? Yeah, you do. There is strategy to that game, but it only shifts the needle a little in your favor, not a lot like some games.

Posted by: Meiczyslaw at October 27, 2011 03:33 PM (bjRNS)

78 Monopoly? Yeah, you do. There is strategy to that game, but it only
shifts the needle a little in your favor, not a lot like some games.

He was 12. The dice were never that kind to me.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at October 27, 2011 03:34 PM (8y9MW)

79 Anybody else notice the Shenanigans with O6q63QKKT0
'Tain't Shenny-whatsis.

Posted by: Patrick McGoohan at October 27, 2011 03:34 PM (O6q63)

80 I say this many times, you have no idea how stupid most of your professors are.
Oh, I left a university teaching post 5 years ago. I know EXACTLY how stupid they are.
I left seven years ago. I'm immensely happier.

Posted by: LibertarianJim at October 27, 2011 03:35 PM (PReJ3)

81 And speaking of Mooch.....

Posted by: laceyunderalls at October 27, 2011 03:35 PM (OZfNl)

82 Just do it.

Posted by: Beefy Meatball at October 27, 2011 03:35 PM (yn6XZ)

83 NYT. 1%. White man's burden.

Posted by: Dewey at October 27, 2011 03:36 PM (YTJQp)

84
Rosen runs a blog called Pressthink, from which I was banned for talking about, among other things, media bias.
Worth a look.

Posted by: Richard Aubrey at October 27, 2011 03:36 PM (iPOrH)

85 Not true. There are multiple internet sites devoted to fans of Moochelle's fashion and style

Yes, but those are upholstery and window-treatment websites.

Posted by: t-bird at October 27, 2011 03:36 PM (FcR7P)

86 Half of being an elite appears to be getting people to call you an elite and accept playing the game by the rules you set. Republican in general always seem far too eager to buy the liberal line whenever its presented.

Posted by: Drew in MO at October 27, 2011 03:36 PM (CAYt4)

87 The New York Times is in Obama's corner. The sun rises in the east.


Obama is a SCOAMF.

Posted by: George Pickett at October 27, 2011 03:36 PM (WXMFA)

88 74....It is not bias if it's a deliberate and conscious action.
That's right. It is out out premeditatedpropaganda. .....'Bias' impliesthat it is unintentional.

Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 27, 2011 03:36 PM (esyI3)

89 Fox News is fully on board with e.g. the "The Republicans control Congress" meme from the earlier thread. There is no alternative media outside of the Internet now.
Posted by: Ian S. at October 27, 2011 03:26 PM (tqwMN)

Conservative talk radio is still a very powerful medium.

Posted by: Soona - stocking up on ammo at October 27, 2011 03:37 PM (y0bJs)

90 Shirkey's Machine.

Posted by: Dan Collins at October 27, 2011 03:37 PM (qlzIv)

91 Just do it

Posted by: Beefy Meatball at October 27, 2011 03:37 PM (yn6XZ)

92

Regarding Obama in 2006 and 2007, he notes -- at this point in time, at
least -- there really was no very credible reason to cover Obama
seriously. He was a little-known very inexperienced freshman Senator.
And black. The odds of him becoming President were less than 100:1.











Yes and no. As early as 2004, SCOAMF was already being force-fed to the
Dem electorate, giving the keynote speech at the '04 DNC (keynote
speeches being the traditional introduction to the party "heir
apparent"). So in a sense, he was already "news" by '06.

It's not as much that the MFM pushed SCOAMF on the public as that they jumped onto the JugEars Bandwagon a couple of years after the DNC already put the pieces in place. They're NOT SMART ENOUGH to push a particular candidate unless the Dem intelligencia feeds them their news copy practically verbatim.

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at October 27, 2011 03:37 PM (G+B5p)

93 Half of being an elite appears to be getting people to call you an elite and accept playing the game by the rules you set. Republican in general always seem far too eager to buy the liberal line whenever its presented.
I was watching some mad scienceshow last night about genuine Carribean witch doctors the other night. Sounds pretty similar.
The theory being the help they get by doping people withpsychadelic drugs, the primary power of the witch doctor to create zombies is the culture, namely, that the people believe witch doctors can turn them into zombies.

Posted by: Entropy at October 27, 2011 03:38 PM (XxXUI)

94 Am I the only who is reminded of PT Barnum's famous "This way to the Egress" ploy when reading about media manipulation? Give the audience something shiny and new, and they'll follow wherever you lead them.

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit at October 27, 2011 03:39 PM (4df7R)

95 Tommy Christopher at Mediaite is already working hard to discredit this series of videos.

Posted by: Alex at October 27, 2011 03:40 PM (/yzYn)

96 James O'Keefe Scores Another Hit

Score 1: Acorn is a dirty cesspool of opportunists.
Score 2: NPR Is a liberal appendage to the Democrat party.
Score 3: Government entitlements are handed out knowingly to those who don't need it or legally qualify.
Score 4: NYT is just a liberal rag masquerading as a reputable news source.

James has a MO going now. Take stuff every conservative believes, really *knows*, but cannot definitively prove, and prove it.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at October 27, 2011 03:40 PM (0q2P7)

97 It is not bias if it's a deliberate and conscious action.
Jerry, just remember. It's not a lie...if you believe it.

Posted by: Matt at October 27, 2011 03:40 PM (90w0O)

98 Elites really like the sound of that word. The camera was at a weird angle, but you gotta know every time he said it, he was pinching his nipples.

Posted by: Beefy Meatball at October 27, 2011 03:41 PM (yn6XZ)

99 95 Tommy Christopher at Mediaite is already working hard to discredit this series of videos.
Posted by: Alex at October 27, 2011 03:40 PM (/yzYn)
All those who are surprised, raise your hands.
...
Nobody? Okay then.

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit at October 27, 2011 03:41 PM (4df7R)

100 Odd that the only thing they got right was about Michele Bachmann being crazy. Then again, our side did more than enough to get that out there, especially after she went after the one true conservative. Bachmann = crazy, Angle = crazy,
O'Donnell = crazy, Palin = crazy and on on it goes, from our own side, even when we see what they're doing right before our eyes on tape. To me, that's way worse than anything I could see from these bastards, at least we know they're our enemies.

Posted by: jeannebodine at October 27, 2011 03:41 PM (iPWtH)

101 James has a MO going now. Take stuff every conservative believes, really *knows*, but cannot definitively prove, and prove it.

So Score 5 will be a video of Obama admitting he's a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure?

Posted by: Ian S. at October 27, 2011 03:42 PM (tqwMN)

102 The most striking thing about this is the lack of any ethical consideration whatsoever. And the hubris.

It may be striking, but certainly not surprising.

Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at October 27, 2011 03:42 PM (1rHeD)

103 My hometown has two newspapers: one very liberal and the other one super liberal.

But as a Kos Kid moby, what do I know?

Posted by: Ed Anger at October 27, 2011 03:43 PM (7+pP9)

104 Anyone else looking forward to Tommy Christopher's attempted rebuttal of O'Keefe in a few hours?

Posted by: Pat at October 27, 2011 03:43 PM (o9lEO)

105 98 Elites really like the sound of that word. The camera was at a weird angle, but you gotta know every time he said it, he was pinching his nipples.
Posted by: Beefy Meatball at October 27, 2011 03:41 PM (bL0wM3)
Bunk

Posted by: Clay Shirky at October 27, 2011 03:43 PM (yn6XZ)

106 So Score 5 will be a video of Obama admitting he's a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure?
Posted by: Ian S. at October 27, 2011 03:42 PM (tqwMN)
I think Score 5 will be video of Obama saying, "Yeah, when I told those people from the Brady camp that we're working on gun control under the table, I was totally referencing Fast Furious."
So more or less the same thing, really.

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit at October 27, 2011 03:44 PM (4df7R)

107
Irrespective of Jay Rosen and Clay Shirky's unseemly and untimely comments, the New York Times will continue to provide unbiased reporting to the world with the acclaimed and recognizable standard, All the News That's Fit to Print.

Posted by: Jill Abramson, Executive Editor at October 27, 2011 03:44 PM (Lt/Za)

108 As early as 2004, SCOAMF was already being force-fed to the
Dem electorate, giving the keynote speech at the '04 DNC (keynote
speeches being the traditional introduction to the party "heir
apparent"). So in a sense, he was already "news" by '06. It's
not as much that the MFM pushed SCOAMF on the public as that they jumped
onto the JugEars Bandwagon a couple of years after the DNC already put
the pieces in place. They're NOT SMART ENOUGH to push a particular
candidate unless the Dem intelligencia feeds them their news copy
practically verbatim.

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at October 27, 2011 03:37 PM (G+B5p)
That 2004 speech had my bullshit detector completely pegged. I knew that garbage was the type of stuff that the libs drench their pants over. And predictably it got over on the fucking rubes and he hasn't lived up to a goddamn word of it.With the MFM it's a dead heat between lazy and stupid regarding what explains them.

Posted by: Captain Hate at October 27, 2011 03:45 PM (G6SvX)

109 O'Donnell = crazy, Palin = crazy and on on it goes, from our own side, even when we see what they're doing right before our eyes on tape. To me, that's way worse than anything I could see from these bastards, at least we know they're our enemies.
Posted by: jeannebodine at October 27, 2011 03:41 PM (iPWtH)

This. Seems like the so-called uneducated rubes on the left aren't the only ones that fall for the NYT line of bullshit and character assassination.

Posted by: Soona - stocking up on ammo at October 27, 2011 03:46 PM (y0bJs)

110 Rosen runs a blog called Pressthink, from which I was banned for talking about, among other things, media bias.Worth a look.

Posted by: Richard Aubrey at October 27, 2011 03:36 PM (iPOrH)

Anything like Journolist?


Posted by: TheQuietMan at October 27, 2011 03:46 PM (1Jaio)

111 Irrespective of Jay Rosen and Clay Shirky's unseemly and untimely
comments, the New York Times will continue to provide unbiased reporting
to the world with the acclaimed and recognizable standard, All the News That's Fit to Print.

Hear, hear!

Posted by: T. Coddington Van Voorhees VII at October 27, 2011 03:46 PM (tqwMN)

112 What these "elites" are forgetting is that one of their other darling's Bill Clinton changed the rules of engagement in Serbia by calling for the direct targeting of media outlets.
Beforethese folks bring about the collapse they believe will vault them into power they need to understand what these new rules mean to them.

Posted by: Scott J at October 27, 2011 03:47 PM (/bVuS)

113 I agree that Fox turned. But where is this conservative blog of which you speak?

Posted by: Cherry pi at October 27, 2011 03:47 PM (OhYCU)

114 With the MFM it's a dead heat between lazy and stupid regarding what explains them.





Don't forget "consciously evil".

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at October 27, 2011 03:48 PM (G+B5p)

115 This should make a funny redeye opening tomorrow.. (depends what time they film)

Posted by: Shiggz undecided - weighing pros-cons-balls at October 27, 2011 03:48 PM (I9fXA)

116 If these outtakes are the best or most damning to come out of the full tapes, there's no there there.

When you distill what Rosen said, consider whether any of this is devastating. Not at all.

Obama: The NYT couldn't cover Obama as if he were a credible candidate, so they covered him as a cultural phenomenon.

(Nowhere did Rosen say that the NYT staff strategized on how they could best help elect Obama.)

Michele Bachmann: The NYT chose not to cover her because they consider her unelectable.

(Not because she's dangerous to their liberal goals, but simply because she's unelectable. Turns out they were right. As for the "she's insane" meme, they've been open and up-front propagating that liberal bias.)

OWS: The NYT may have been aware of the nascent OWS movement, but didn't cover them at all for almost two weeks.

(Rosen did not say that it was a coordinated deliberate strategy in any way. He simply noted that it wasn't covered and that in his opinion it gave them time to get their act together. Where's the big problem with that comment? He didn't even say that he SUPPORTS OWS, though he almost definitely does.)

We Are The Elite 1%: They simply call themselves the elite

(My company (in software consulting) claims that all of us employees are part of the rarified software elite. We do it too. And it's not really true. I've run into any number of truly excellent software guys in the companies I've worked with that are just as good as any of us. Claims to elitism are just par for the course.)

So, yes, there's some obvious liberal bias in Rosen's comments, but nothing that really leaps out at you and grabs you by the throat to pay attention. It's all very mild: Comments about strategy. What's needed is audio or video capturing actual NYT strategizing in support of liberals and in opposition to conservatives. This is not it.

Posted by: Mike Devx at October 27, 2011 03:49 PM (dcpnd)

117 Yes and no. As early as 2004, SCOAMF was already being force-fed to the Dem electorate, giving the keynote speech at the '04 DNC (keynote speeches being the traditional introduction to the party "heir apparent"). So in a sense, he was already "news" by '06.

Correct.

So these learned journalsim profs aren't even getting that right. As I stated above Newseek had him on the cover as early as 2004 -as "the one" to watch.

Posted by: tasker at October 27, 2011 03:50 PM (rJVPU)

118 edit:Newsweek

Posted by: tasker at October 27, 2011 03:50 PM (rJVPU)

119 Obamas Time Magazine writing was pretty early like 04-05

Posted by: Shiggz undecided - weighing pros-cons-balls at October 27, 2011 03:50 PM (I9fXA)

120 Posted by: Mike Devx at October 27, 2011 03:49 PM (dcpnd)
Does this make people more or less inclined to believe the New York Times is not the unbiased paper of record it claims to be?

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at October 27, 2011 03:51 PM (FkKjr)

121 Does this also go on amongst journalist types who DON'T look like naked mole rats?

Posted by: nickless at October 27, 2011 03:52 PM (MMC8r)

122 'James O'Keefe Score Another Hit'......"Dude!, Don't be such a Bogart! Pass it on!"

Posted by: Typical #OWS Occu-Tard at October 27, 2011 03:53 PM (p/bp2)

123 >OT here but how many of you that are competitive haven't wanted to do this at some point?
Monopoly Bucks passed Dead Presidents in relative value some time in early 2009.
It is now obviously serious business and sometimes unfortunately, the only game in town.

Posted by: ontherocks at October 27, 2011 03:55 PM (HBqDo)

124
The Democrat Party lemmings and some independents were piped over the edge of the cliff with clever marketing inducements, to elect the most unqualified narcissistic sociopath to ever disgrace the people's house.

Posted by: Doctor Fish at October 27, 2011 03:57 PM (Lt/Za)

125
110
Not exactly. They talk about the press, the future, various issues. They might talk about, say, the coal mine collapse where the report was that the guys were okay when they weren't.
I would say they're concerned, on the blog anyway, about the press now and in the future. They don't like to hear the press loses credibility when they are seen as biased left, making stuff up.
Rosen calls those who claim press lib bias "culture warriors."
Liberal as hell, most of the commenters, and they think Bush is a moron, as is Palin and, afaik, they've never talked about, say, Biden's goofiness.

Posted by: Richard Aubrey at October 27, 2011 03:57 PM (iPOrH)

126 So. Obama girl was a fabrication? I knew those boobs were fake.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at October 27, 2011 04:00 PM (jx2j9)

127 So. Obama was a fabrication? I knew there was nothing in that suit.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at October 27, 2011 04:01 PM (jx2j9)

128 No Hannah F'n Giles!

Posted by: EC at October 27, 2011 04:06 PM (GQ8sn)

129 OT here but how many of you that are competitive haven't wanted to do this at some point?

This was a nice touch in the report:

Chavez went to jail, went directly to jail on a variety of charges,
including aggravated battery on a household member with a deadly weapon
and battery on a law enforcement officer.

Posted by: toby928© at October 27, 2011 04:08 PM (IfkGz)

130 Rosen has spent years telling conservatives who complain about the way the media covers things "Culture Warriors".

Posted by: MayBee at October 27, 2011 04:20 PM (PLixr)

131 'James O'Keeke Scores Another Hit'....."You sank my battleship!"

Posted by: James O'Keefe, always sinks the battleship at October 27, 2011 04:20 PM (p/bp2)

132
It would be real nice if "conservative" politcal bloggers were able to recognize when the narrative is being set and not fall for it. But, alas, that doesn't seem to be the case.
Did you know Steve Jobs was a jerk? Yeah. That's what I hear.

Posted by: Jaynie59 at October 27, 2011 04:22 PM (4zKCA)

133 Admissions contrary to interest, not evidence.

Posted by: Mikey NTH at October 27, 2011 04:28 PM (hLRSq)

134
Is there is a downside to arguing with a liberal and calling him a fucking bald faced liar in front of 15 people?

I cant seem to find one.

Posted by: irongrampa at October 27, 2011 04:30 PM (SAMxH)

135 I honestly don't know how this country survives with a media as despicably biased as this one. Yeah I know we have Talk Radio and the Internet but there is no making up for sheer volume of repetition that you get from the dominant media. I work with intelligent, educated people and you have no idea how many have no idea of who George Soros is. They do however know about the Koch brothers. And that is because of the endless instruction they get from the likes of the fuckers this article is about. I really am starting to think that we don't survive.

Posted by: LGoPs at October 27, 2011 04:48 PM (+Uv5V)

136 What was the 21.06.2011 on the screen? Obviously it wasn't the date since OWS wasn't going on then.

Posted by: csm at October 27, 2011 04:53 PM (6MiMG)

137 Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

Posted by: steevy at October 27, 2011 05:27 PM (fyOgS)

138 As to the part about the hometown paper being liberal, well absolutely! If you look around most markets that have a city within it with more than 150K population, the paper is probably owned by/affiliated withthe NY Times.

Posted by: Uncle Jefe at October 27, 2011 05:33 PM (+3fAP)

139 Oh, Ace; tell me it ain't so, tell us it's not come to this: you're now depending on James O'Keefe for "news" and "exposés".

Posted by: Rex the Wonder God at October 27, 2011 05:50 PM (vahvH)

140 @139

No, Rex, Ace is depending on you....so get to"work".

Posted by: THE C.H. Truth at October 27, 2011 06:03 PM (ZY+lZ)

141 These guys are really quite good to listen to.

I'm not sure what point O'Keefe thinks he's making by producing that snippet Hello part of his call to Jay Rosen. And grabbing that exclusive "Do whatever you want to do" thing, hey that's earth-shattering, that'll RUIN Rosen and cause a tsunami to descend on the NY Times and sweep up Shirky in it's wake.

And what's with the suggestion that these guys are speaking in some "secret" conflab? This was panel was clearly open to the public (altho they clearly booked it for a room that fit their expectations for attendance). These guys are both "public intellectuals", each has a public blog where they discuss this very same stuff all the time, every day, and they teach at the same public university.

So, let's move on and consider what they're saying. They're talking about the design of establishment journalism in the context of what Rosen calls 'he said-she said' journalism. We don't get the full impact of what they have to say about all that because O'Keefe edits so selectively, but we can always go on YouTube and listen for hours and hours on end to them saying fully and exactly what they're saying, so why bother with O'Keefe?

Probably because "someone" thinks we're all morons.

Posted by: Rex the Wonder God at October 27, 2011 06:09 PM (vahvH)

142 1. "Although Shirky is himself a liberal"

Okay; not sure whether that means anything, but sure ...

2. "and a big NYT booster"

Now, where does Shirky say that? Nowhere on this tape. So we have to trust Ace for that judgment. I, by the way, think that is not so. I think Shirky likes a lot of things about the Times and at the same time DISLIKES a lot things about the Times.

3. "he's adept at explaining how media bias is actually practiced."

Well, yes he is; that's why he's a prof at NYU, that's what he focuses on, that's why his blog is so popular, that's why people buy his books, that's why he's become a cultural icon, etc etc.

But, so what? He's offering his views to the public, free here, free on YouTube, free on his blog, and all of it consistent with what he teaches for pay at NYU, and consistent with what he publishes in his books.

What's your friggin' POINT?

That despite his QUALIFICATIONS to do get things right, he still gets things right?

And that these are somehow "secret" truths the world needs O'Keefe to find out about?

Shiite. Just go to Shirky's blog already: it's all there, fully open, free of charge, with not the least little bit of contradiction between what he says there and what he's saying in this talk that O'Keefe edited.

Try to think for yourselves for a change:

http://www.shirky.com/weblog/

Posted by: Rex the Wonder God at October 27, 2011 06:19 PM (vahvH)

143 So. Obama girl was a fabrication? I knew those boobs were fake.
Her penis was real.

Posted by: Not Drinking Nearly Enough at October 27, 2011 07:22 PM (HtUdo)

144 Imma say what I always say: I never heard of anybody worrying about if their grades were good enough to get into journalism school. Buncha dummies.

Posted by: Penny at October 27, 2011 08:55 PM (eFMsP)

145 Hmmm...What's up with Rex?

He seems to worship someone so mentally retarded that he had to get a Ph.D. in journalism, which I think my shower curtain mold just earned. Congratulations to my shower curtain mold.

Posted by: AmishDude at October 27, 2011 09:30 PM (73tyQ)

146 1. There is no 'here' here. See "Acorn".

2. Where does shirky say he is 'shirky'? See "NPR".

so whats your piggin FROINT? huh?

Posted by: Rex the Wonder Concern Troll at October 27, 2011 10:13 PM (fDGF1)

147 This is nothing new. Back in 2000 during the election, I was detailed to Secret Service for candidate protection. Most of my assignments were in NYC because Gore and Hilliary (she was entitled to protection as First Lady while running for Senate) were there on a regular basis.

On one trip, we took Gore to the NY Times for a private meeting with the editorial staff, who advised him on his campaign coverage. We then went to CBS, where he sat with Dan Rather for a few hours and took advice from him.

Posted by: elliot at October 27, 2011 11:02 PM (vY/HY)

148 Were you in on the meetings or stationed close by?

Posted by: rdbrewer at October 28, 2011 12:18 AM (1DJgI)

149 This info is a terrific read. Thanks for the info.I am looking forward for more updates. ipad 3 converter hulu converter convert mts files

Posted by: doumaduo at October 28, 2011 05:26 AM (UTyvb)

150 Rosen has a response up at Pressthink. He's a victim. Of course.
Claims the editing was done to make things look different and more ominous than they really were.
One commenter reminded him that O'Keefe has always released the unedited material--which the Big Time Media never does--and that, to date, the unedited material has supported the edited release.
IOW, Prof, don't ride the Mis-Edited horse too far.

Posted by: Richard Aubrey at October 28, 2011 08:59 AM (iPOrH)

151 Newt is on the Mike Gallagher show. Listen online if you can. KNTH Houston has a stream.

Posted by: The Schwalbe : © at October 28, 2011 10:10 AM (UU0OF)

152 DooM wHateVeR yoU hAVe tO DooM.

Posted by: Jay Rosen's Mother at October 28, 2011 03:37 PM (oVLxz)

153 www.filters-king.com, filters wholesale, filters manufacturer, spare filter parts

Posted by: john at October 29, 2011 11:59 AM (9ySs0)






Processing 0.02, elapsed 0.0252 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0081 seconds, 162 records returned.
Page size 88 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat