Category Archives: Media

My Favorite Maureen Dowd Column

As you may (or may not) know, Maureen Dowd is a typical New York Times lefty whose columns make great bird cage liner. However, she has an older brother, Kevin, whose conservative views must make for some interesting family reunions. Once a year, Maureen turns over her column to Kevin, who takes full advantage of the opportunity to undo all the damage inflicted by his sister during the previous year. This year’s column is no exception. A must read.

From the comments:

There are all kinds of theories to explain you and Kevin, including birth order (eldest child generally conservative in order to maintain the status quo), Remember that Nature shuffles about 30,000 cards upon the fertilization of an egg during the process of known as genetic recombination which can make siblings seem almost unrelated at the end. Of course, dropping a baby on the head doesn’t help (ask mom or dad this New Years to finally fess up which one of you they dropped). While you’re asking, you may pull mom off to a corner and ask her if she now regrets that thing she had for the milkman. Does Kevin have red hair? Let’s just say that you both keep the Nature versus Nurture debate alive and well. To both you and Kevin, I bid you peace on earth and goodwill to all men (and women).

It’s reassuring to know that, at least in some families, the bonds of love are stronger than politics.

Advertisements

Climategate and the Media

John Coleman, founder of The Weather Channel, doubts that we will ever hear anyone in the MSM utter the three most important words in character-building: “I was wrong.”

He predicts the media will stubbornly stay quiet on the Climategate story until it fades away. But there is one possible development that will make this story so huge that it will overwhelm them.

Read the article to learn more . . . .

“The Emperor Has No Clothes!”

Rosslyn Smith sees a profound irony in the location of next week’s climate summit: Copenhagen, the birthplace of Hans Christian Andersen’s story, The Emperor’s New Clothes.

It begins, after all, with two con men who promise they can weave cloth of unsurpassed beauty to the enlightened but which would be invisible to any man who was unfit for his office or unpardonably stupid. They would then tailor that fabric into a fabulous suit of clothes for the emperor. The emperor invested in the venture because such traits would be useful to someone like himself as emperors tend attract both sycophants and self serving manipulators.

Smith notes that the real lesson of the story is not the arrogance of the emperor, but the willingness of his courtiers to suspend reason in support of an obvious lie. The parallels to the current global warming crusade are remarkable.

I can almost excuse the politicians and the speculators who promoted AGW.  Like Anderson’s emperor, they invested in a tool that would advance their self-interest. Representative democracies are supposed to have checks and balances to help keep such self-interest within reasonable bounds. In addition to the way the researchers themselves violated scientific standards, the actions of our journalists and educators who jumped on the AGW bandwagon made matters worse.  People in these positions are supposed to promote healthy skepticism. Journalists see themselves as the guardians of transparency in government and educators in the pursuit of enlightenment.  In fact, our legal system grants special rights to journalists because of their role as the watchdogs and whistle blowers.

But like the emperor’s court, our media and academia have chosen to play along with the scam. Now, finally, someone has had the courage to lay bare for all the world to see that, indeed, the whole enterprise was fabricated out of thin air.

Stossel on Journalistic Bias

John Stossel documents his transition from a typical left-wing government-knows-best journalist hack to a thoughtful free-market libertarian — and the price he paid to make that journey. The experience has given him a unique perspective on the issue of bias in journalism.

Reporters who think coercive government control is generally good and I, who thinks voluntary market forces are generally better, both have a point of view. So why am I the one called biased?

Rush, the NFL, the MSM . . . and Integrity

Only one of the three has it.

The double-standard shown by the NFL and the media in the recent flap over Rush Limbaugh’s bid to buy ownership in the St. Louis Rams is over-the-top shameless. John Hawkins draws five important lessons from the episode. The last one is directed at conservatives:

Maybe conservatives should actually start raising a lot more hell about issues like this one. When Hollywood, the NFL, and the mainstream media conclude that conservatives aren’t suckers who will still hand them money even as they’re insulted, maybe the insults will stop. . . . If conservatives do nothing else in the next few years — well, besides taking back Congress and defeating Barack Obama — we should insist on an end to that double standard.

Global Warming Tipping Point?

No, not the tipping point Al Gore has warned us about. Rather, the tipping point in the media’s move away from AGW alarmism toward skepticism. Marc Morano documents the media’s gradual shift toward a more balanced coverage of the science behind the issue. The result is a growing number of skeptics.

The science is so overwhelmingly obvious, that sooner or later the questions could no longer be avoided.

Finding Truth in a Post-Journalistic Age

With the mainstream media becoming increasingly irrelevant,  and the rise of extremely partisan bloggers on the left and right, how can the average citizen find a balanced source of information to determine the truth on critical issues of the day? Ron Radosh looks at the challenges that face the news consumer trying to sort out the facts on a story like the recent ACORN scandal.

Is there any truth to the charges either side makes? If one listens simply to the TV talking heads, no one will know what is true or what is false. You watch the side you already agree with, and take the argument of those who you listen to in order to reinforce the opinion you already have.

Radosh has a point here. With partisans on both sides retreating deeper into enclaves of rigid group-think, the process of debate and compromise — which is the genius of our democratic system — becomes ever more difficult.

Radosh, however, sees a glimmer of hope in a handful of television programs that feature spirited dialogue among representatives with opposing views. As much as we might disagree with those of opposing views, it is important that we take the time to listen to each other.