Showing posts with label blogs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label blogs. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 01, 2010

Yak and Check


YAK
Longtime reader/commenter Porter asked if I'd cross-post his latest on Mr. Siegel. Here's the opening:
"Didn’t Siegel get some prize or whatever, a while back? Or am I thinking of somebody else?

Yesterday he was ‘considering’ a new film that deals with the speech problems of King George VI, and Colin Firth, the lead actor in the picture, was there to explain. He did so quite well, despite the fact that Siegel was more interested in the king being some sort of out-of-date figure, or whatever...."

CHECK
I've put a link up to NYT Check on the sidebar. For a while I'll have it near the top and eventually move it into the company of the other media critique links. Happy to have the media hounds go viral....

Sunday, September 07, 2008

Bubble Talk

Scott Simon was curious about the blogosphere and why on earth people would read blogs. So for answers he turned to someone outside of Washington and the establishment media - okay, at least outside of NPR -Jose Antonio Vargas of the Washington Post.

Simon: "Do people turn to the blog [sic] because they think they're not getting information from mainstream media?"

Vargas: "I think there's a feeling of that. There's a feeling that they're not getting enough, or they're not getting it in context, at least the context that they want to get it. I mean I think one of the things that the Internet has affected in terms of our news culture is that people want to read what they want to read. If you're a conservative who likes to support Sarah Palin you tend to visit sites that are supportive of her. If you're critical of her you tend to visit sites that are critical of her. Of course that's just one side of it; there are readers online who are honestly and carefully looking at information and weighing things in, but I would also say that in this highly partisan use environment and partisan electorate that we have, people are drawn to information that they want to see."

See, news outlets like NPR aren't failing to inform you - about US secret prisons and torture, the million plus dead Iraqis, Israel's nuclear weapons, US support for death squads in Latin America, etc., etc. - it's just a feeling you have. And worse than just a feeling, it's just your own narrow prejudice of wanting to read what you want to read, you close-minded, highly partisan blog reader! Shame on you...

Thursday, December 27, 2007

Very NPRish


In the "Open Thread" below readers have commented on NPR's series about blogs. The inimitable Steve Inskeep sets the tone for this sad waste of news time that occasionally rises to mediocrity. On Monday's Morning Edition show (12/24/07) we get a "radio version of a weblog" repleat with cutesy little sound effects such as echo-chamber sound to indicate hyperlinks and a corny "boing" to represent clicking on a link. The beginning of the piece features a montage of voices blathering on about trivia and Inskeep chimes in "Ok, random people I've never heard of talking - this is pretty much how it is when you're going, surfing blogs." He later adds, "fragmented thoughts, this is very bloggish."

This opening salvo in the series sets the bar pretty low. We hear a lot from one of the earliest daily personal diary bloggers, Justin Hall, we tells us "to receive attention from strangers is so flattering and that's what weblogs offer." And keeping with the stupid and inconsequential, Inskeep reveals, "I can post my own comment about everything that's been going on, so let me do that now, and I want to begin not by talking about something that Justin Hall actually said but about my feelings...what I FEEL anyway..." (Irony, thy name is Inskeep!)

Christmas morning's present to listeners isn't much better - in spite of Raed Jarrar's blog getting a mention. In case you thought yesterday's stupidity was a fluke, Inskeep jumps right back in with "This week on Morning Edition we're asking a cosmic question: If a tree falls in the blogosphere does it make a sound - a sound that makes sense?" He goes on to wonder, "Maybe you even think they all [blogs] sound like this:" a cluttered audio montage of tabloid gossip, juvenile remarks, and trivial comments then follows. Renee Montagne then talks to Sarah Boxer of the NYT who is putting blog posts into a book. Montagne is just amazed that bloggers might write something worthy of publishing; shocked she exclaims "blogs that were compelling enough to make the leap - get this - into a book!" OMG! Boxer seems harmless enough, she does cite Jarrar's blog, but her ear for the bitter and sardonic is pretty wooden. She really loved the blog by a marine in Fallujah (blogs from sites of war crimes are sooo cool). The post she chose was one where the marine is amused by the PX overstocking supplies. He writes, "sometimes it's just weird, like panties, lacy black women's panties." He just can't imagine what the US military could be planning to do with all those women's panties! Boxer also hasn't a clue what a media critic is. She sneeringly notes "Bloggers who profess to be against the mainstream media, kind of want to be part of that. It's still something to go for."

Wednesday's piece was probably the best of the bunch. It dealt with the risks to bloggers in countries such as Egypt, and the US military's paranoia about soldiers blogging too freely.

Today's feature was a bland one about a Chicago mom of six turned unoffensive humorist who has landed a book deal! Wow. Of all the great bloggers to feature, we had to get this. We'll see what comes tomorrow...

Thursday, March 22, 2007

A Good Corrective

I was headed out to a state park this afternoon with the car radio on when I heard a reporter talking about Josh Marshall and Talking Points Memo. It's a good thing I was able to stay on the road as I had to look down to be sure that the radio was in fact on my NPR station.

On this blog's Tuesday's Open Thread a reader commented:
"One thing I've noticed in the last few days is the determination of NPR to defend the Bush administration explanation on the firing of US Attorney Carol Lam.

As Josh Marshall (talkingpointsmemo) has argued, understanding the Lam firing is crucial to understanding the whole scandal. The Bush administration's explanation is garbage, as is NPR's defense of it."
Well, today NPR did a fine thing--a story on Talking Points Memo that gave them credit for breaking and sticking with the US Attorney purge. The report was done by NPR's Robert Smith, and opened with Michelle Norris stating, "the web site Talking Points Memo dogged the story, gathered information from around the country, and pushed the issue forward with a little help from their readers."

Way to go NPR. Man, it feels good to say that!