The point is, the MSM sucks most of the time because you can’t really trust them to report facts anymore. It’s all sensationalized, overblown ratings-wars. There are certain media outlets that are better than others. My rule of thumb – if the news program isn’t dull as hell, then you shouldn’t be watching it.

I know it’s not good marketing unless you “entertain” people, but just like being in a classroom, at a certain point (at least once you reach college), you should be adult enough to pay attention to serious issues without having a three-ring circus going on in the background. My favorite news sources are all the programs on PBS and listening to NPR. The reason I like them is that I normally learn something, which I consider to be a good thing.

The elite news media has consolidated a lot, which has reduced diversity and consolidated power in fewer hands. I don’t see any difference in the trust thing. I don’t know anything about the media elite either so why should I trust them more than bloggers. And it’s quite obvious that they apply liberal doses of their own interpretation to news-worthy events.

The best thing about blogs is that there are so many of them. Elite media is so incredibly narrow in comparison that the bias of a few individuals can color all the news in the “preferred” direction. Unfortunately, this very narrow viewpoint is what’s passed on as the official version of events and is exposed to the largest percentage of the populace. That’s incredible power in the hands of a small, select and elite group of people. And we complain about power held by big and bad business corporations? I can’t believe you don’t see that, being a blogger and all.

As an example, consider the Katrina coverage by the elite media. They got just about all the most important facts wrong, and plastered them on the front page. It’s Bush’s fault – it’s global warming – it’s white racism against blacks and on and on. What happened after the real truth started getting out? Did they do the same front page splash? I think it was Popular Science that eventually came out with the most in-depth expose of all the mis-reporting and urban legends. Of couse, bloggers were there way first exposing much of the media stupidity. How totally cool.

So what’s a body to do? Read the MSM stuff and get part of the facts some of the time and then make a fool of yourself spouting MSM learned stuff only to find out much later that most of what you said was not exactly true? Or turn to blogs and take personal responsibility for finding the real truth. I guarantee you far more facts and truth are out there in that big pile of bits than you’ll ever find in the elite media.

And another thing. There are many truly great opinion bloggers out there. As good if not much better than much of the elite media syndicated op-eds. Not to say there aren’t good ones in the MSM, but the percentage of goof-balls is way high for such a tiny group.

So excuse me for being “not an adult” and “brain dead”. I simply don’t agree with you. And so far all your arguments have no persuasive power whatsoever, at least in my brain-dead opinion.

You might want to check on the lessons from the Plame controversy. Did anyone in the media get in legal hot water for publishing classified information? If what was illegal was the publishing of classified information, we wouldn’t have needed such a lengthy investigation, we knew who published it. Where the issue came into play was that it was illegal to leak the classified information to the media in the first place.

Once again, all the focus is on the NYT but, if their publishing this information was such a big deal, why is nobody concerned about the individual(s) who leaked this information? You’re right. It is funny how things have changed since then. The media was given a free pass when her name was printed but investigations into who leaked her name went on for years. This time around, the media is taking all the heat and nobody seems to be concerned with who leaked the information in the first place.

The media are a business. So in addition to being attacked by absolutely every self-serving pol and every smart-ass with a computer, the media has to try and turn a profit. If they don’t they go under. That is the ‘leash’ we hold.

As for preferring bloggers, good grief, you’d rather put your trust in people about whom you know nothing, who in any event simply comment upon or re-interpret what they read in the MSM? I say this as a blogger: 95% of what political bloggers write about is info coming from the MSM. A minuscule proportion is independent reporting. Bloggers can be a very useful tool for understanding and critiquing the MSM, but the idea that we have somehow replaced the MSM, or that you should avoid the source and trust the interpretations is foolish.

Americans love to attack the media because it is easy, it’s a fun gang activity, it requires very little thought, it allows people to sound wise and independent, and it costs nothing. And some of that criticism is deserved. But this piling on, me-too, aren’t-I-terribly-clever-for-trashing-a-newspaper-I-don’t-read thing is tired, worn out and brain dead.

This is why I don’t read mainstream magazines or newspapers or watch network news anymore. I did that most all my life because that’s all there was. Then I discovered blogging. Wow, real experts, not some journalism major who didn’t have much of a clue what they were reporting on. And a diversity of opinion AND facts never found in any of the old media. Plus I find blogging to be much more enlightening and educational (and fun too).

You avoided discussing my main point. Who controls the power of the MSM press? You can’t get rid of these guys in an election every 4 years. And please tell me you’re not so naive to think they can’t get caught up in the lust for power and their own personal agenda just like politicians do.

I think we let the press off way to easy. What’s wrong with the idea to keep these guys to the highest possible standards of ethics and responsibility? Look at the crap Dan Rather tried to pull. And the blogs are just packed full of examples of how the press misleads Americans on very important issues. Their job is way too important not to expect, no, to demand they act according to the level of responsibility they hold in our nation. You know, the same thing we demand out of our politicians, the military and our government in general.

No, I’m not giving the press a free pass – they don’t deserve one.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

What are you, a communist? Put a leash on the press? You’re worried because they have more power than the president to affect public opinion? And this worries you because tyrannies are forever being imposed by reporters?

Please tell me you’re a kid. Please tell me no adult American is this ignorant of history.

The NYT published classified information. The way I understand it, that’s not legal. I learned this fact from all the loud breast-beating that went on over Ms. Plame, our super-secret 007 CIA special-agent getting outed. Funny how things have changed since then. It appears to me there is a BIG double standard here.

I’ve read Mr. Keller’s pontifications about how noble he is and all the agony he went through prior to publication. I’ve never read such total pandering horse-pooey. I certainly don’t want an “I am so holy” idiot like him making command decisions about what the lowly American public needs to know. What makes him so qualified to make those decisions anyway? A journalism degree? A job title? Has he been elected to represent the American public?

People say we need a leash on government. I’m not so certain we don’t need one on the press too. I think they have way more power to sway public opinion than the government. Think about it – a handful of people, not elected to their office, not responsible to anyone, have had almost total control over the message to the public. That REALLY worries me too. Thank God for alternative media. A lot more of the truth gets out now, plus much greater diversity of opinion..

I say we need to hold the press to the same high standards of ethics and responsibility that we expect from Bush.

Was it right to publish? Who could know, at this point? I think it was, but that’s just the lowly opinion of a uneducated white guy. Truly, only history will determine the ultimate rightness of the thing, and for that we just have to wait.

Arguing about legality, though, seems to me to completely miss the point. Both sides have legality on their side. The treason people have legality. The constitution people have legality. Whose legality is greater? I refuse to partake in that argument. It’ll degenerate into the same sort of endless go-around that abortion people engage in.

There are questions about the programs legality. Cheney and Bush have repeatedly bragged about the program. There were no secrets revealed that harm anyone.

Anyway, it seems most people here think treason is the wrong (wrong, wrong, wrong, etc. etc. ad nauseum) word to use. Fine, we’re all on the same page there. Luckily, it doesn’t seem as though the Europeans will stop cooperating on monitoring banking transactions, at least according to counterterrorismblog.org . That means all the calls of treason were the usual cynical overreaction. I still think the Keller et al. are a bunch of dipshits for publishing it in the first place, but reasonable people can disagree. Without calling anyone a traitor, even.

Happy Fourth of July, everyone!

The first thing I would like to complain about is something you are all missing. I would like to complain about calling this thing that our country is doing against the vague notion of “terrorism”… a “war”.

It is not a war. Any more than the “war on drugs” is a war. You cannot war against an idea, or an object. It won’t work. How many times in the history of humanity has some leader or group of people tried to stomp out an idea completely? Ideas don’t go away, and ideas create objects, which won’t go away either.

Yet, the American people refuse to learn. More than 20 years after the advent of the “war on drugs”, it continues in its fullest fury. Drug lords and politicians in South and Central America continue to kill each other unabated, the US continues to try and flood the problem with money and helicopters, average American men and women languish in prison while our tax dollars feed and clothe them… ALL BECAUSE RICHARD NIXON DECIDED HE NEEDED A BETTER CAMPAIGN PLATFORM.

People shout back and forth about why it’s not working… there’s not enough money spent… there’s mean people working against it… God hates us and won’t let us succeed because we are no longer His chosen nation… whatever. One common string unites all of the arguements, and yet people refuse to see it in above their petty ranting. WHAT WE’RE DOING IN THE WAR ON DRUGS IS NOT WORKING.

This brings me to my point. What makes us think that a “war on terrorism” will work? Is our country truly any safer than it was ten years ago? OF COURSE NOT.

Today, a terrorist could drive a tanker truck full of kaboom onto the Golden Gate Bridge, and not a soul would see it coming. This is just one of a million ways to wreak terror, and we’ve closed off about… two of them. No more crazy Saudis will sneak onto an American airplane with a knife and run it into a sky-scraper, and probably no randomly-pissed off bubba will mail anybody any anthrax. How likely is a terrorist attack to happen again soon on American soil? If you ask me, the chances are somewhat iffish, maybe, could happen, but then again, maybe not, maybe… who knows? The world has changed.

In some ways…

Yet in some ways, it is the same. And Americans, like the mass-media-lead sheep herd that we seem to be, completely miss the point. The point is not security. The point is not drugs.

The point is that the world is changing around us, and we must change with it. When politics moves too much to the right, that is a scary thing. Silly wars happen, people die, and we go in debt. We must fight to get things back on an even keel. Incidentally, I think that’s what the editor of NYT had in mind… an even keel. Regardless of the legality, regardless of the mindless set of side-details that everyone wants to concentrate on so much… “He’s a traitor!”… “No, he’s a true American… go Free Speech!”… these things are all beside the point. An even keel is truly what matters.

Sincerely:

John B. Shelton

PS: For those of who you raised your fists in victory because I said mean things about those of the political right just now, don’t get too excited. I’m not one of you either. When politics moves too far to the left, trees get hugged, there’s free love, everybody gets AIDS, and we all go into debt all over again.

Go Even Keel!

Yes, because the electorate has the right to know what their government is doing.

After all, just who is supposed to be in charge? The electorate or the government?

Because there are always people who think they can slip between the cracks. To compare them to a much more commonplace happening, these are the people who see the speed trap but cruise through 25 mph over the speed limit anyway. Even though they know the speed trap is there, they take their chances, hoping the police officer will either somehow not notice them or not care enough to stop them.

If the enemy knew about this program from disclosures like these, and then why did they continued to get caught? My guess is that some did know and have avoided getting caught; others did not know and have paid the price. The same could be said for the people who support the financially. The difference is that now everyone knows. Read the rest of the http://counterterrorismblog.org/ from June 22 till now, these are the people involved with the program.

Now, let’s consider the fact that it was not widely known. How widely known was it that people could carry box cutters or knives with blades shorter than, if I recall, 3 inches onto airplanes before 9/11? I sure didn’t know you could do that. I thought any knife or potential weapon was not allowed on board. I always packed my pocketknife with a 2-3 inch blade in my checked luggage because I didn’t want it taken at a checkpoint. From my understanding, the information that these potential weapons could be carried on was not secret but was not widely known. Yet Al Qaeda knew.

My point is that Al Qaeda is in the business of knowing not generally known rules, enforcement techniques, and loopholes. If the SWIFT operation was public knowledge, which it seems there is no argument it is not, it’s very safe to assume that Al Qaeda knew about it and most likely knew more details about it than we want to admit. Chances are very good that the NYT breaking this story did not give Al Qaeda any information they did not already know. It just gave the general American public information that Al Qaeda knew but the average Joe on the street never took the time to consider.

Should the NYT have reported this story? Maybe, maybe not. Anyone who thinks they know all they need to know about this story to make such a judgement is either naive or doing a good job of kidding themselves. However, likewise, anyone who thinks there’s no way Al Qaeda could have already known what the NYT printed is also either naive or kidding themselves.

Is it harmful to the efforts to combat ‘terrorism’? Any one committing an illegal act (as terrorism and its financing are) and isn’t conscious of efforts to detect it (efforts Bush himself has been more than willing to trumpet since 9/11) isn’t anywhere near the threat they’re being portrayed as.

SWIFT itself is no secret, and far less likely to be for any international financier of terrorism.

Is publicly shouting its existence a risk? No, because anyone smart enough to send money in such a way should know the risk it’ll be monitored and tracked somehow. Who said SWIFT is the only tool used? How do you know the banks haven’t caved like most of the TelCo’s did? You don’t.

Is the USG’s use of SWIFT illegal? It (probably) isn’t in the US, but may be in Europe. Ah, so now it’s OK to disregard other countries’ laws, too?

The NYT SWIFT story is another report of the Administration conducting surveillance without legal oversight of any kind, and once again an embarassment to a WH who’d much rather keep everything they do under wraps.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, we’re living in a post-9/11 world. Just don’t be surprised if it turns into pre-1776 nation.

One side screams “traitor” the other shouts “freedom of the press” but few stop and ask “was the Times right even though they had the right?”

A lot of perceptive writer and pundits have now spent a lot of time either vigorously defending the press’ freedoms or vigorously making a case for treason–but few are willing to dicsuss the issue on more practical and realistic terms.

The New York Times did not commit treason. But neither was their decision to publush the story some grand act of press freedom. The truth, I think, is somewhere in between. The way I see it, the Times was wrong but not treasoness. Unfortunately, few people want to discuss it in those terms.

The same techniques probably have been used for some years (without checking I would guess at least ten) for tracking the proceeds of drug trafficking.

Now, that also may not be widely published.

The point is this. AlQaeda and Taleban are both (have been both) deeply involved in drug trafficking.

Can you possibly imagine that they had not learned, even BEFORE 2001, that others were looking over their shoulders? Is it inconceivable that elements of their finance distribution systems have not gone “missing” in the past? More to the point can you not imagine they might learn from those experiences?

Another instance.

Every time I fly in or out of NZ, one of the questions on the Customs form is “Are you carrying currency in excess of NZD1,000?” This is not asked for my own safety, so that they can allocate me an armed guard or anything. If an AlQaeda agent were to arrive at Auckland, is he so stupid that he would not pass the word back to his bosses at the earliest opportunity? “Hey boss, be careful who you send with cash into NZ, and how much they carry”.

Second, Customs make no secret of the fact they catch people not declaring cash, and what happens as a result. Take it from me, if you don’t declare and get pulled then you can expect a long stay at the airport.

Oh, and is Customs guilty of treason because they participate in “real life” tv programmes showing people getting caught? They don’t say “how”, other than “them’s the rules, this is what we do…”