Crazy uncles do much better…

Posted: September 4, 2009 by datechguy in internet/free speech, opinion/news
Tags: , , , , , ,

…If nobody ever hears about them.

11:30 AM EDT

From a Nexis search a few moments ago:

Total words about the Van Jones controversy in the New York Times: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy in the Washington Post: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on NBC Nightly News: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on ABC World News: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on CBS Evening News: 0.

If you were to receive all your news from any one of these outlets, or even all of them together, and you heard about some sort of controversy involving President Obama’s Special Adviser for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, your response would be, “Huh?”

It’s unfashionable to quote oneself so quickly but it’s worth repeating this paragraph:

All are part of “subgroups” within their groups their opinion and their theories are accepted and unquestioned but when exposed to the general public they become problematic. 30 years ago one might have been able to hide these views, but in the age of the internet and YouTube that just isn’t as easy as it once was. This is why it was so vital to the media to ignore those associations for as long as possible.

I suggest that the well known non-vetting of then Candidate Obama wasn’t due to merely to adulation. I submit it is because the press knew that his positions could not survive vetting to the general public…

…and even worse to them Sarah Palin would be vice president today. What’s journalistic ethics compared to that?

Update: Nice Deb lists some nice questions.

Comments
  1. […] the times decided to ignore this and other stories (read Van Jones) at the cost of their credibility with the […]

  2. […] this would not have been possible without the long term cooperation of the MSM. Acorn videos, Van Jones, Tea Parties, “Racism”, Ken Gladney, Anita Dunn, Kevin Jennings, ¿Quien sabe? and […]