MSM: Trying to improve the Bottom Line?
Simon Scowl at Deceiver is upset.
He's discovered that the blogosphere, which was the only place--besides, of course, the National Enquirer--doing any digging into John Edwards' affair with Rielle Hunter and his cover up operation--is serving as the Mainstream Media's unpaid and uncredited Research Division.
Weird, huh? Deceiver was the only place talking about this stuff for at least a week and a half, and all of a sudden everybody else has been doing original research on it the whole time? Or maybe it doesn’t count as research when we do it, since we’re just a silly gossip blog with a hot-pink logo. Maybe that’s it.
Dear Serge F. Koveleski, Patrick Healy, Toby Lyles, and everybody else at the New York Times:
You know the blogs and tabloids beat you to this story. Everybody knows. It wasn’t exactly difficult, considering you guys waited almost three weeks for John Edwards to give you permission. You’re not going to salvage your reputation by pretending otherwise.
Also, somebody should talk to whoever writes your headlines. “Behind a Meeting That Exposed Edwards’s Affair”? Why not just type out an equivalent number of Z’s?
Your uncredited researcher
Updates to story at DBKP.com: Mainstream Media Uses Blogosphere as Unpaid Research Wing in Edwards Scandal
DBKP also has been affected. A few weeks ago, the Times of London's SARAH BAXTER, inserted material from our July 23 John Edwards Affair: Interview with David Perel, Editor-in-Chief of the National Enquirer into her Times' story--without a word about the source where she stole the material.
We wrote about the plagiarism after being alerted by blogger, Doug Ross in MSM Stealing Blog Content: Times Online Joining Growing MSM Trend?. Baxter's article (readers will have to do their own Googling--the Times gets no link here) gives the impression that she contacted National Enquirer's Editor-in-chief, David Perel and talked to him.
Our three letters to the Times remain unanswered. The Times Online still carries Baxter's story with our material, without attribution.
These two cases are not the only ones: one reader alerted DBKP yesterday that portions of a story posted on one network's website "sounded suspiciously like something you wrote about a few days ago".
We read the article and suspected a little--okay, a lot--rewriting may have occurred. But, what the hell? At least, some effort was expended by a Mainstream Media reporter furiously trying to get up to speed on a story Big Media blacked out for nine months with all the fervor of a religious zealot.
Of course, the MSM wouldn't have had to resort to these shady practices if just one of the members of their clubby community had investigated allegations surrounding John Edwards nine months ago: but that would've put a dent in the invitations to the wine-and-cheese parties.
The only investigation came from the National Enquirer and a few bloggers. But, you wouldn't know it if you watched the Big Media frenzy of this past weekend. Some stories didn't even mention the National Enquirer by name--it became an unnamed "tabloid".
John Edwards' "confession"--forced on him by the "tabloid trash" National Enquirer-- transformed the MSM from an early-July Rip Van Winkle into August 8 Woodward and Bernsteins. Don't believe that? Readers only have to stifle their gag reflex and tune in to the MSM coverage.
Readers--and writers--of the blogosphere can expect more of the same. With MSM "news" organizations cutting staff in an effort to stay afloat, stealing from the blogosphere serves as a profitable way to "cover" stories previously denied to readers.
The John Edwards scandal is only the latest battle between citizen journalists and a MSM in a death spiral. It won't be the last. Big Media has proved incredibly resistant to changing editorial policies that have driven readers and viewers to find other, less left-leaning content.
Polls show that the percentage of people who trust what the MSM writes hovers somewhere between carnival barkers and used car salesmen. More Americans believe in UFOs than believe the Mainstream Media is unbiased.
The media reaction: attack citizen journalists and hunker down behind excuses of "standards" that drove ex-customers away with the highly-selective nature those standards were applied. Oh, and practice a code of denial that would make John Edwards proud.
The Mainstream Media wants to improve their bottom line?
Clean house of editors intent on serving up the same cheesy gruel of socialist opinion masquerading as news. The public's been onto that scam for years: falling stock prices and ad revenues confirm it.
Or CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, Time, Newsweek, and the New York Times could try billing the Democrat National Committee for PR services rendered.
P.S. Welcome to the club, Simon.
image: dbkp reference file