Wednesday, January 17, 2007

No Coverage Equals No Credibility

The Anchoress rightly observes that the lack of intellectual curiosity on the part of the press regarding the theft and/or destruction by former national security agency director Sandy Berger of various classified documents is a reason that many Americans no longer consider them to be credible. She writes:

Yooooo-hooooo Mr. and Mrs. Mainstream Mediaaaaa…if you’re wondering why your credibility is lower than congress’ once you step out of your insulated little parties and coastal enclaves, this is why, in a nutshell: because you are willing to completely overlook anything - even the blatant theft of classified documents in what appears to be some sort of cover-up conspiracy regarding something done by a Clinton or Clintonian minion - and you’re not even discreet about it. Everyone - literally everyone in the world - knows that if Berger’s name was Rove or Rice or Hughes the story would never have disappeared - it would be a front-pager for the ages; Chris Matthews would dehydrate from all the mouth-foaming, Keith Olbermann’s head would explode nightly as he demanded not just imprisonment but death, death to all Bushies! There would be investigations and hearings - lots of hearings - CSpan would be the new A&E! The story would make careers! It would keep the red-inked press rolling in the black for years!

But Sandy Berger, “uh-huh-huh, that’s just old Sandy…stuffing classified documents in his drawers, ‘losing or inadvertantly’ destroying others, folding some of ‘em up and dropping them under a trailer at a construction site in the dead of night…uh-huh-huh, we love Sandy.”


The unwillingness on the part of many to cover this story reveals the reason that many observers only roll their eyes when a journalist somewhere starts getting all breathy about the sacrosanct media.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home