September 14, 2004

Let's shake the pyjama tree again...

Cassandra, over at I Love Jet Noise, make this observation:

The lifeboat is full of holes, but instead of addressing the problem the media resort to insulting their competition: a grassroots network of independent amateurs determined to get at facts the media refuses to cover. As stories like the initial blackout of Bill Cosby's remarks, the AP "Bush crowd boos" debacle, and CBS's Memogate demonstrate, bloggers are, in some cases, actually driving the news cycle.

This, of course, is what has them pissed off. They no longer fully control the news. You should read the rest.

Frank J takes the usual suspects prisoner. Not.

* If approached by the MSM, don't make any sudden movements or they'll misrepresent you.

* In cable news, CNN is left leaning while FOX News is right leaning. The leanings of MSNBC is unknown since no one watches it.

Go read. There's more. I still need to get a "Nuke the Moon" T-shirt, too.

We interrupt this meme to bring you a report from the "Kerry Lied, Good Men Died" rally last weekend, via Jennifer at A Collection of Thoughts.

To heck with the meme: Via Kate at The Original Musings - Didja know that in Nurse Bloombergs New York City, at least, you can be arrested for undertipping? We at Castle Argghhh! are good tippers, better than the restaurant's stated 'requirement' (and we've both done food service, so leave me alone - I've been known to go back to an establishment days later when I realize I got distracted and stiffed someone) - if I leave a crappy tip, I got crappy service. Be interesting to see how this turns out.

Back to the meme... the soon-to-deploy Greyhawk at Mudville Gazette does a little sleuthing on CBS in re: Abu Ghraib.

That's it for the moment. I've gotta go take some pics.

John | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack (1) | Politics
» Sneakeasy's Joint links with: In Defense of Bloggers
Comments on Let's shake the pyjama tree again...
Jennifer Martinez briefed on September 14, 2004 07:38 AM

One factor that I think makes a difference is that we are NOT doing what we do for money and or a career. We have no boss, no deadline, no one to answer to except ourselves and our readers. We are doing a service, so to speak, filling in the gaps, providing the other half of the story and in some cases providing the story itself since the "media" refuses to do so. There is a need and many in the blagosphere have chosen to rise to the occasion, if you will. And we don't do it for money, prestige or fame... we do it for all the right reasons, in my opinion.

Jennifer Martinez sends

Alan briefed on September 14, 2004 09:10 AM

As residents of the Castle may have gathered, I have one problem with the amateur vigilence - the lack of story creation. It is a reactive process which inclues and is often overwhelmed by a lot of messy finger pointing of left and right. Too much yahooism and not enough big picture. If the Republicans are fully right about Kerry in the Vietnam era and the Democrats are full right about Bush in the same era, nothing really turns on it ultimately. Our lives will be affected by economics, war and security - not what you did in your twenties.

It is not far off our recent Canadian election where the Conservative party is a ttacked for being stuck in a neo-con funk while the governing Liberals (a title they could almost copyright now) are slammed as generic crooks. [Lesser parties get lesser slanders.] But at a policy level there is no debate and if there was much in common would be found...or even, God forbid, ideas that no one has thought of yet.

I would not wish to censor but I wish there was as vigourous debate on issues as appearences.

John of Argghhh! briefed on September 14, 2004 09:34 AM

Alan, I kind of addressed that in an earlier post. The medium is yet in it's infancy. How it matures will be, well, interesting, in that Chinese curse kind of fashion.

Alan briefed on September 14, 2004 10:32 AM

Does its maturing need guidance? Ethical standards for reputable opinion making and fact gathering? Perhaps even at the outset a loose association of the trustworthy of whatever background or opinion base. If we acknowledge that, ought we not work towards adopting it?

Post a comment

Remember personal info?