Grazing the opinion columns at lunch today, came across this piece by George Will. While I think his comment on “direct democracy” is off-base, he makes some very incisive comments on why putting Ahnold in and thinking this is a Republican major victory is dumb. Nice article.
I tried Google with no luck and don’t know who Will writes for. Can you put up a link?
Newsweek?
I haven’t seen it but I’m not surprised. Will has written against this recall from the start. He doesn’t like the precedent it sets.
Wow, Will sticks to his principles for once.
Sorry for not including the link (just forgot.)
Yeah, Will can be very articulate. I think he usually sticks to his principles most of the time (you probably like this one more than others, Jason. 
)
forgot, someone else has posted the link to the Post.
BTW - whether you like the page or not, drudgereport.com has a very nice set of links to just about every new wire and columnist, right, left, and middle, at the bottom half of the page.
forgot, someone else has posted the link to the Post.
BTW - whether you like the page or not, drudgereport.com has a very nice set of links to just about every new wire and columnist, right, left, and middle, at the bottom half of the page.[/quote]
I won’t give him the hits, regardless of how useful his page may occasionally be. Drudge is a tabloid sleeze without any concept of journalistic ethics or integrity. He’s been caught repeatedly inventing stories or propogating stories that turn out to be bullshit, simply because he refuses to engage in even rudimentary fact checking before going public with a story. It’s despicable. He should have stuck to going through celebrity trash cans.
Well, he kind of sounds like a bitter social conservative.
forgot, someone else has posted the link to the Post.
BTW - whether you like the page or not, drudgereport.com has a very nice set of links to just about every new wire and columnist, right, left, and middle, at the bottom half of the page.[/quote]
I won’t give him the hits, regardless of how useful his page may occasionally be. Drudge is a tabloid sleeze without any concept of journalistic ethics or integrity. He’s been caught repeatedly inventing stories or propogating stories that turn out to be bullshit, simply because he refuses to engage in even rudimentary fact checking before going public with a story. It’s despicable. He should have stuck to going through celebrity trash cans.[/quote]
Ah - yeah, you wouldn’t see somewhere like the NY Times posting anything that wasn’t totally true and checked out, right?
well, 99.9% of what he has on his page is simply links to other sources. It surprises me a bit that it is labeled an exclusively “right wing” site, as usually it links stories critical to the right and the Repubs as well as the left. I don’t use it a lot because other news pages on my “News Page” link page tend to be better and more timely, but once in a while he will post a link before anyone else gets it.
A quick glance right now: links to nytimes and usatoday and london times and yahoo news, articles on the chinese orbiting the earth, a breaking article from Munich where the admin is feeling out a defensive missile system against Iran (could we BE any dumber?) in Europe, articles on Rumsfeld reportedly being frozen out of Iraq decisions from the Financial Times, a note that Franken has knocked O’Reilly out of the NYT #1 spot, a story about a special ed student being elected homecoming king at a high school, etc. Hardly a page with an obvious agenda - at least today.
Linking is a far cry from writing. Try reading the stories he comes up with, or watching what he presents on television. And there’s a big difference between failing to ever fact check a story, as Drudge systematically does, and very rarely slipping up, as the New York Times does. Particularly as when it does fuck up, the Times issues a mea culpa. Find me an instance of Drudge apologizing when it’s turned out that his stories were bullshit.
Yeah, you can poke around http://www.drudgereportarchives.com/ and see some amusing bits where he silently takes down links/text attacking liberals when something exculpatory comes out.
Man, you guys are so paranoid. I check his page about once every three days or so, and it just isn’t the big conspiracy you guys are making it out to be. Please read it for a couple of weeks and then point out all of the stuff you’re so up in arms about. It’s primarily a cheap-ass google news in many ways, in the way it links to a variety of sites. And I’ve seen just as many “special reports” that are as critical to the right as the left (although I imagine, from the pop up ads, that the readers are probably more conservative than not.)
That’s lovely and, par for the course, anecdotal, but does absolutely nothing to refute the point that Drudge pays no mind whatsoever to ethical standards of journalistic behavior. If you’d care to actually argue the contrary point, I’d be happy to listen, but it’s beginning to seem that every time you’re on the opposite side of an issue, all you can provide is personal stories of what you’ve seen someone do, or what you’ve enjoyed reading on their site, or what you’ve seen on television. There’s no meat on that bone, my friend.
Is there a reason I should care about the journalistic ethics of a site I use only to supplement fark.com to find interesting links?
Is there a reason I should care about the journalistic ethics of a site I use only to supplement fark.com to find interesting links?[/quote]
No. But apparently it’s really fun to talk about, so you might want to give it a shot.
Is there a reason I should care about the journalistic ethics of a site I use only to supplement fark.com to find interesting links?[/quote]
No. But apparently it’s really fun to talk about, so you might want to give it a shot.[/quote]
When stories that he invents from whole cloth are picked up and used by television news channels and radio pundits, or used to slander people running for political office, yes, you should care. We’re all harmed as the standard of discource and debate continues to be dragged into the mud and drowned there.
What the Hell are you ranting about? I said his site is 99% links to stories on a wide variety of sources - that here’s what’s on there today - that I’d like to see some examples in the next few weeks of the kind of stories that so offend you. What the fark is “anecdotal” about that - Drudge is a site that anyone can look at and see what it is and isn’t. That’s not a “personal” story. You’re whining about a site that you said you refuse to read, and then throw out all manner of generalities. My contrary point was read the damned site and point out some specifics of what you’re talking about instead of all of this “moral outrage”. I’m no fan of Drudge, just pointed out to someone that he has one of the best sets of links to columnists of all stripes, I have no emotional feelings towards the site at all since it’s just basically a links page. Your the one throwing out all the crap, without specifics (at least Jason provides specifics) about how he’s the downfall of western reporting. Sheesh.
Wasn’t that “Rush Limbaugh addicted to prescription drugs” story broken by the National Enquirer, a veritable icon of journalistic integrity?
Jeff, remember when he insisted that “Clinton’s black baby” story was about to come out for like a month? With no links whatsoever? It was all just blind quotes, if I remember right.