Ted Canova On Media

FEEDBACK

RATHER GRASPING FOR LIGHT

Posted by tedcanovaonmedia at 12:49 PM on June 17, 2008

Reader's Reply/ 6/8/08

Rather does not believe in the alteration of McArthur's, "old reporters never die they just fade away... grasping for the limelight."

It is sad to see him struggling to get guest shots on Chris Matthews' syndicated show while Brokaw is lionized on MSNBC which found the perfect way to keep him in the GE corral.

Of course when you think about it, it is kind of a Karma since he engineered Cronkite's complete disappearance from CBS. A virtual ban and a resource that might have kept CBS from being a solid #3 during Rather's watch.

My question would have been a bit different, " do you believe because of the way the story was reported that the media was afraid to follow this story because of the blowback you recieved?" No one has ever toughed this since Rather screwed it up. The gist of the story was dead on; the reporting was not.

There is no doubt the media got in to bed with the Administration and the Pentagon, they had the chance to present the first war live with their imbeded correspondents. David Bloom paid a high price for his well publicized Bloom-mobile.

But one thing needs to be also considered and that is the context of the times. In 2002 Americans WANTED jingoism. Dissent, even criticism were treated with disdain, contempt and in Bill Mahr's case, cancellation. It took 2000 soldiers killed before we started to look at this differently. Want to know when shock and awe ended? When the first soldier was killed post-deposing Saddam. Who? The soldier who went to get a 7Up and was shot in the back of the head. That started it all. It embolded the insurgents.

I watch local news now and shake my head.

RATHER'S ROLE

Posted by tedcanovaonmedia at 02:56 PM on June 16, 2008

comments (1)

Reader's Reply/ 6/8/2008

Have always believed that Rather was set up on the national guard story. Leak papers that you can later discredit as false, and you've just innoculated your candidate from any further investigation into a real issue.

No one will want to touch it. It's a three-fer: vaccinate your candidate against the issue, take out a media icon loathed by your base, cow other media. I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but this is one I buy.

FANS VS. SUPPORTERS

Posted by tedcanovaonmedia at 09:27 AM on June 05, 2008

comments (1)

Reader's Reply/ 6/4/08

so this morning i was listening to radio blah-blah (you know the one) and one of
their reporters talked about last night's obama event and the crowds both inside
and outside the ex. the thing that struck me and stuck with me all day
was that this reporter referred to all those people as fans of barak obama.

FANS! FANS! FANS?

bobby kennedy had supporters. gene mc carthy had supporters. john lennon had
fans.

what bummed me when i heard it and what has bummed me all day since is,

one: that the reporter was, is and will ever be totally unaware of what he
said and equally unaware of any distinctions, and

two: with incredible precision and with pure naivete', he illustrated why we
are doomed. if they are indeed fans, we are doomed. if the reporter is wrong,
we are doomed.

so, as i was processing what i had just heard on radio blah-blah, they moved on
and went into a live interview with walter mondale who, when asked about obama's
big night at the ex, refered to obama as (clearly he intended to say the words:
presumptive nominee) the punitive nominee! yes, he said punitive. the
interview rolled right along without anyone seeming to notice. that's when i
decided that, rather than ponder the prophetic implications and rather than rip
open my radio looking for that prankster, karl jung, i would just turn radio
blah-blah off, which i did. then i slammed a patti smith cd into the slit above
the radio and turned her up louder and louder until things started making sense
once again. today's journalism? i' a fan. (what WAS brittney wearing tonight?)