Journalists (sic) drop the veil [Darleen Click]
1953 — my father, now 85, was fresh out of the Army (having been recalled for Korea), started working in the newspaper business in Los Angeles. First at The Citizen News, later for The Examiner (leaving when they merged with The Herald). While he worked the advertising side, he frequented the newsroom and got to know many of the reporters.
He also got me started, when I was 10, on the same newspaper habit we both still have. Dinner time was when we would discuss one or more articles we had read that day.
Some time in the early 70s my dad pointed out the subtle changes that were taking place. Reporters — cynical, skeptical bloodhounds who dealt, like Sgt Friday, in “just the facts, m’am” — were giving way to new J-school grads who arrived at the newsrooms with the ink barely dry on their diplomas and a burning sense of purpose in their bosom to not be bound by “antiquated principles of objectivity and neutrality*“. They aren’t there to report but to be the creators of meaningful change.
Reporters learned their craft in a way resembling apprenticeship — coming up the ranks from copyboy to reporter. Each small step granted on trust, the next one given only if the former was competently performed.
But Journalists expect to start out in the newsroom and balk that those who dare question either their credentials or point-of-view.
So no one should really be surprised to observe the public mutual masturbation between Pravda-media and The White House
According to the Atlantic, Time managing editor Rick Stengel’s decision to join the Obama administration is just the latest example of a new trend among mainstream media journalists who are making it official by officially joining the Obama administration. Stengel, who is joining the State Department, is just one of 15 (or 19) who have given up a career in journalism to join Obama’s crusade to fundamentally transform America:
A wave of reporters went to work for President Obama early in the administration, a time when many media organizations were going through layoffs and Obama’s approval rating was sky-high. The flow has tapered off since then. The Washington Post’s Ed O’Keefe has semi-regularly kept tabs on the number of reporters working for Obama administration, counting 10 in May 2009, 14 in 2010, and 13 in 2011. The Washington Examiner’s Paul Beddard counted 19 reporters working for “Team Obama” in February 2012, but he included liberal advocacy groups as part of the “team.”
Whether the number is 15 or 19, the fact that this many so-called journalists from outlets as influential as CBS, ABC, CNN, Time, the Washington Post, Boston Globe, and the Los Angeles Times want to work at the very same administration they are supposed to hold accountable, is not only troubling, it also explains a lot.
Can you say quid pro quo?
I knew you could.
Tags: bias, journalism, quid pro quo, reporters