This was going to be a completely different post. This week President Obama went on the Tonight Show, since, in this civically complacent, lazy and ignorant country, far more voters will watch him there than in his press conferences. In the process of his relaxed chat with Jay, the President made a number of surprising gaffes, verbal, factual, geographical and historical: 1) he confused the Summer with the Winter Olympics, 2) he incorrectly said that Russia’s Putin had been the head of the KGB (he was a long-time mid-level KGB official), 3) he seemed to say that Savannah, Georgia, Jacksonville, Florida and Charleston, South Carolina are on the Gulf of Mexico, when in fact they are on the Atlantic Coast, and 4) he mangled his words so that he appeared to be wishing that more people were killed in terrorist attacks, when he meant to say, pretty obviously, that too many people were killed in traffic accidents. Naturally, the conservative media went crazy with “we told you so’s” after this, recalling the President’s infamous “57 states” mistake and hammering its long-held contention that the President’s vaunted brilliance and mastery of knowledge are carefully maintained, teleprompter-aided myths.
My post was originally going to point out that this is nothing but “tit for tat,” two-wrongs-don’t-make-a-right unfairness melded with confirmation bias by conservatives and the right-leaning media. Yes, it’s true: these are exactly the kinds of mistakes that the liberal news media (but I repeat myself *) have roasted and mocked various Republicans over, from Eisenhower to Reagan through Dan Quayle, both Bushes, Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney, and those attacks were excessive and unfair, at least most of them.** True, Obama is more arrogant than any of these, and it is somewhat satisfying to catch him saying something that would be corrected by a seventh grad teacher, but that’s a petty motivation to claim significance for what is more likely the result of fatigue and poor briefing. I think its fair, indeed necessary, for the media to point out the blunders, if only so the public isn’t actively misinformed, and if the fact of his giving out flawed information lessens the tingle up the legs of some Obama supporters, so be it. Still, it’s not a big deal, and shouldn’t be represented as otherwise, regardless of the clear double standard at work.
This is a big deal, however: The Associate Press actively and intentionally set out to cover for the President, and hide his most significant gaffe rather than report on it. In quoting the President’s erroneous statements about the Gulf ports that aren’t actually on the Gulf, the AP’s version was this:
‘”If we don’t deepen our ports all along the Gulf – (and in) places like Charleston, S.C., or Savannah, Ga., or Jacksonville, Fla. – if we don’t do that, these ships are going to go someplace else and we’ll lose jobs,’ Obama said.”
That’s a blatant partisan clean-up job, not reporting. After several blogs blew the whistle on the AP, it issued a retraction and apology:
SAVANNAH, Ga. (AP) – In an Aug. 7 story on President Barack Obama’s comments on the need to deepen U.S. harbors, The Associated Press wrongly inserted an interpretive phrase in parentheses into a quote by Obama:
“If we don’t deepen our ports all along the Gulf – (and in) places like Charleston, S.C., or Savannah, Ga., or Jacksonville, Fla. – if we don’t do that, these ships are going to go someplace else and we’ll lose jobs,” Obama said.
\Charleston, Savannah and Jacksonville are not Gulf ports. It wasn’t known if the president was suggesting they were. The AP should not have added the phrase in an effort to clarify his statement….”
No kidding, it shouldn’t, just as the entire journalism establishment shouldn’t be selectively reporting the news to downplay the Administration’s lies, cover-ups and failures; just as it shouldn’t have been slanting its coverage in both the 2008 and 2012 elections to give maximum support to the President; just as it shouldn’t be openly advocating Obama policy initiatives like gun control and limited illegal immigration amnesty; just as it should be actively investigating and covering still unsettled scandals like the IRS’s suppression of conservative groups, the Benghazi cover-up, and Fast and Furious.
Just like the news media, including the AP shouldn’t be blatantly biased and partisan in support of the President and his party, when their function is to be non-partisan watchdogs, critics and guardians against abuses of power. But it is. The AP “correction” of the President’s actual words, which is, as far as I can tell, unprecedented and therefore significant in what it reveals, is just a symptom of a far greater problem.
It is a problem that creates a real threat to democracy, and has since the beginning of the Obama Presidency ratcheted up what had been previously just a persistent bias into a full-fledged partnership between government and media. It is shocking and disappointing to me that progressives, liberals and Democrats lack the integrity and the perspective to reject and condemn this, just because it appears to currently work to their benefit. A nation without an independent, trustworthy news media is at dire risk from the abusers of power, and the AP’s attempt to cover for President Obama, trivial as it seems, shows us that the mainstream news media isn’t monitoring the potential abusers, but in league with them.
* I am stealing the line from DC conservative radio host Chris Plante, who is kind of a jerk, but an often clever one…
** No, I don’t put ridiculous misrepresentations of American history in the sameexcusable category when the speakers are self-proclaimed Constitution-worshipers and uber-patriots like Palin and Michele Bachmann, and I would be as hard on Obama if he said the “shot heard round the world” was fired in New Hampshire, or that John Quincy Adams was a “Founder.”
___________________________________
Sources: Newsbusters, AP
Ethics Alarms 
The media have covered up for him from day one. So many red flags, so little interest; what do we really know about this man who spent so much money to seal all his records? Had the Chicago Tribune by way of the L.A.Times not gone after Jack Ryan’s sealed divorce records (sealed to protect his son), the country would certainly be in a different place today. Maybe if we knew what he had to hide it would explain why he can’t put ten words together to make a coherent sentence not punctuated by “uhs” unless he’s using a teleprompter. I’ll never forget the image the POTUS-to-be in the rodeo ring reading off the TOTUS.
Okay, he’s not my favorite President. But can’t we give Obama at least a little benefit of doubt, regardless of the partisan media edits? I read his comment about ports as a stream of consciousness. He might, in fact, not know which ports are on Gulf shores, and which are not. But if you take what he said, and – instead of using the dash and parenthetical “(and in)” – use the ellipsis…he is simply being inclusive of jurisdictions he happened to think of at that moment, where he would like to see more support for (what we might presume is) his agenda.
Yes, there has been consistent and annoying partisanship in Obama’s favor in many media; many have rendered themselves untrustworthy. I just don’t want to see “See?-SEE?!-I-TOLD-you-so!’s” become more a reflection of confirmation bias, pettiness and counter-partisanship on the part of otherwise fair and wise observers.
I dunno. Maybe I am employing one of them thar “razors” and shouldn’t.
It’s a tough question. You don’t want to call it into question SO OFTEN that people become numb to seeing it; on the other hand the media do it SO OFTEN that it serves a real purpose to point it out to let them know you know they’re doing it.
But I am not sure it does any good, as they seem to have no shame at all.
Even if Obama had correctly said “southern ports on the Atlantic”, his statement would still have been lacking in substance. As the statist he is, he was doing another of his “infrastructure” rants about federal spending on matters that, even were they needed, are not the domain of the federal government. Had he said that these three ports contained naval bases and it was therefore of interest to the federal government that they be kept dredged out for major warships, he would have had a point. As it was, this was likely (as with the roads and bridges nonsense of before) nothing more than another attempt to divert public attention from the harbor full of “tramp” scandals that have dropped anchor off his wharf… and are pumping their bilges!
Pretty funny Jack, even though it’s a bit over the top. Generally, the media has always tilted towards Democratic politicians, and it’s easy to understand why. Media personnel, are younger, better educated and have a larger portion of minorities. These are Democratic strongholds.
Under the Obama Candidacy and Presidency, the media is even more slanted towards Democrats. Part of it has to do with his image, and part of it has to do with Republican Policies becoming even more conservative.
So complaining about it will get a Mea Culpa, like the AP, periodically… However it will not change the trend.
Will Republican just FU the media like it’s been doing, or will it make an attempt to reverse the trend?
Now before we start on the soapbox about ethical behavior, let’s not forget the very partisan decisions from the Florida Supreme court and the SCOTUS over the Florida recount decision in 2000. I would expect more from the Judicial Branch than from Journalists.
I just about snorted coke out my nose when you suggested the press was “better educated”. I’m sure you think they are more attractive and naturally smell better, too. Yesterday, I read an article that combined everything wrong with education and the media into one short article. A high school ‘math’ teacher decided to try to make math ‘fun and relevant’ so his students would learn it. He had them try to see if double stuf and mega stuf oreos have double and more than double the stuffing. Their results, the fact that ABC News picked up the story, and the teacher’s (apparent) ignorance about what he did wrong made quite depressed. Their results were that double stuff had 1.9x the stuffing as single stuff and mega stuf has 2.7x the stuffing. I guess since his results weren’t EXACTLY 2 and 3, that the company owes everyone some money.
Please show me where I said that…not in THIS post; I just searched for it. If I did write that, EVER, I was either delirious or someone stole my password. The press is spectacularly undereducated. The profession attracts shallow, undisciplined minds prone to delusions of grandeur and confirmation bias. One of the reasons the world doesn’t work is that we all depend on people explaining complex matters to us who are not smart or educated enough to understand them themselves. Obviously there are some smart, competent journalists, but a high proportion of them are unethical.
Show me that passge, and I’ll delete it with a retraction.
He was responding to the genius Jj, who was obviously making a non-partisan, objective observation of what every sentient being, deep down, knows to be true, concerning the superior intellects, morals, and bodily odors of Democrats.
Lies to cover up for “your guy” are a betrayal of journalistic ethics.
Which side “your guy” is on matters not a whit to me.
Well, it does a bit. I’m partisan enough to feel worse about it if “your guy” is “my guy” too, whereas I expect a little of it from the (BOO HISS!) other side. That’s why they’re on the other side, because they do stuff like that.
Now pardon me, my bias is showing.
Or maybe it’s that if I’m not on the moral high ground, maybe I should shift position till I am, and not worry overmuch about whose banner flies over it.
Right now in the US I feel that there’s no moral high ground visible, just swamp vs sewer.
Right now in the US I feel that there’s no moral high ground visible, just swamp vs sewer.
Yes, this. Preach on! There are very few of our so-called “leaders” one can endorse in any way without holding one’s nose.
Yup !
The short answer to the question asked in your headline is………No. I agree with your post that the problem is of paramount importance, even if the gaffes are not. Without a fair and free press, our way of life is eventually doomed. What scares me is the speed of our downfall.
Actually, it’s a bit of a non-sequitur to ask if they will admit it when the question is will they ever realize it? However, in either case, the answer is no.
I have a hard time believing that, because it I did believe that, I would have to believe that the Left does not believe in democracy. I know the latter is a popular opinion among some on the Right, especially Right-ish radio talk-show hosts. I cannot believe that that Democrats are so immune to no-partisan objective fairness that at some point most, or a critical number, will eventually say, “This is wrong, bad for the country, and has to stop.”
I’m not so far right as those talk show hosts, but I’ll go so far as to say the idea of what constitutes the proper implementation of small-d democracy held by certain folks on the left may be a different idea than held by those on the right. I also believe both sides are more interested in taking and holding onto power than they are in holding to principle.
It’s very convenient for the left right now to partner with the media because that way they have an easier time staying in power while the media has an easier time simply reporting what makes the left look good and coasting by what doesn’t. It’s a win-win situation. The way they see it, only losers in this deal are the conservatives, who are bad people anyway and don’t deserve to win. Unfortunately, as is becoming increasingly evident, the country as a whole is likely to be the loser, as the left’s policies are not producing as wonderful results as they’d like to have us believe.
However, both sides will fight like hell to maintain power, even if they aren’t using it too well, and I do believe enough on the left and in the media are ok with holding back just enough of the facts from the democratic process for just as long as it takes to get them another four years (the trickle-out regarding Benghazi being one such example), which, if not outright “not believing in democracy” is certainly not allowing it to operate as designed. However, this paying of lip service to the idea of democracy is probably enough to fool enough on the left that it is going to be almost impossible to reach that “critical number” unless and until there’s a clear act of outright tyranny that can’t be justified under any circumstances.
So the big question is, how do we silence the press so they do not report anything that hurts our agenda. How do we force them to write articles that advance our agenda, regardless if they are true or not?
When the press is already kissing your president’s ass (witness them behaving like groupies on Inauguration Day this year) there’s no need to force them to do much. However, a discreet phone call here and there or a specific mention of a journalist in a speech or other pressure (Bob Woodward would be an example of pressure) is usually enough to convince them to fall back into line. .
A very large part of the Progressive movement doesn’t.
Oh, they will tell you that they do, but they also think that opinions they don’t agree with should be silenced, and several (including members of the media) think those who disagree with them should be killed, and no one much says they are wrong for saying (let alone thinking) that.
So time for you to think of another pleasing lie to tell yourself Jack, because the people you are thinking the best of don’t deserve it.
Liberals believe that police in the U.S. should not use torture.
Progressives are certain that Stalin did not use enough torture.
Oh, to be young again and believe in happy ever after (sigh). Sorry, but I’ve seen too many instances of the ends justifying the means with what seems like the majority of them.
Are there other countries that lack an independent, trustworthy news media and have abusers of power?
You could start with Venezuela.
Please tell me you’re joking.
related
Oh shit; I just saw the date of the last posts! I hope no one sees me talking to myself.