At PressThink, Jay Rosen promotes an article he has posted at TomDispatch, “The Beast Without a Brain: Why Horse Race Journalism Works for Journalists and Fails Us.” Rosen writes that it is “about how the campaign media cannot easily make decisions, change course, or learn from its screw-ups because it is a ‘herd of independent minds.'”
Among Rosen’s points:
Just so you know, “the media†has no mind. It cannot make decisions. Which means it does not “get behind†candidates. It does not decide to oppose your guy… or gal. Nor does it “buy†this line or “swallow†that one. It is a beast without a brain. Most of the time, it doesn’t know what it’s doing…
Because we have evolved a way of talking about the news media that fails to recognize this very basic fact  no mind! can’t decide a thing!  everyone is free to grant more intentionality to the organism than reasonably exists…
The current generation of political reporters has based its bid for election-year authority on its horse race and handicapping skills. But reporters actually have no such skills…
Though horse race coverage of political campaigns has long been attacked — even within “the media” – Rosen tries more than most critics to come up with an explanation as to why “the media” cannot break this bad habit, even as he argues that the concept of “the media” is a gross over-simplification.
Rosen is correct that discussing “the media” is an over-simplification, but it is not a gross one. In discussing the dynamic of pack journalism, Rosen does not consider that — at least in political journalism and punditry — the “herd of independent minds” exhibits groupthink, a phenomenon most likely to occur when its members are similar in background, when the group is insulated from outside opinions, and when there are no clear rules for decision making.ÂÂ
I suspect that this is because Rosen disagrees with me on the politics of “the media” in this context, despite study after study after study after example after example times thirty-nine on one side of that debate — and that is just in how journalists self-identify their politics. In this context, I am not asserting a political intent on the part of “the media.” I am asserting that a general level of political homogeneity is part of the similarity of background and insulation from outside opinion that are characteristic of a groupthink that can manifest itself in pack journalism.
Instead of considering the influence of groupthink, in his full article, Rosen builds on a November 2007  New York Times op-ed by Mark Halperin of Time (and ABCNews before that) who argued that “the media” operates from a flawed thesis in Richard Ben Cramer’s book, What It Takes, about the 1988 battle for the White House:
“I’m not alone. The book’s thesis — that prospective presidents are best evaluated by their ability to survive the grueling quadrennial coast-to-coast test of endurance required to win the office — has shaped the universe of political coverage.”Voters are bombarded with information about which contender has ‘what it takes’ to be the best candidate. Who can deliver the most stirring rhetoric? Who can build the most attractive facade? Who can mount the wiliest counterattack? Whose life makes for the neatest story? Our political and media culture reflects and drives an obsession with who is going to win, rather than who should win.”
Rosen heartily agrees:
Right there, Halperin identifies the roots of mindlessness in campaign coverage: All right, press team, when that door opens, I want you go out there and find out for us… WHO IS GOING TO WIN?
That’s the baseline question. But how good a question is it?
It is a lousy question, not least because prediction is punditry, not reporting. That it is the baseline question says a great deal about the extent to which journalists have abandoned the distinction. But substituting a media obsession with who should win is not the answer. Americans already believe this is the focus of “the media” and it is destroying public perceptions of the credibility of “the media.”
Moreover, even if Rosen’s suggested approach was adopted, there is no guarantee journalists would serve their audiences much better than they do now.ÂÂ
Rosen touts the example of Charlie Savage and the Boston Globe sending the presidential candidates a detailed questionnaire on the limits of executive branch power — an idea growing out of Savage’s earlier reporting on the “unitary executive” and the drive to create an “unfettered presidency.”ÂÂ
Set aside the fact that presidents, once in office, become believers in the “unitary executive theory,” dating all the way back to Jefferson. The fact remains that no one was asking about it in 2000, because no one — “the media” included — knew it would become an issue after September 11, 2001. There may be some value in asking that question now, but the candidates’ answers are no more binding than their answers in a debate setting, e.g., then-Gov. Bush’s opposition to nation-building in 2000. It is far from clear that gazing in the rear-view mirror is necessarily superior to gazing into a crystal ball for horse race results.
A more revolutionary approach might be to have “the media” spend a little less time covering the horse race and serving up the candidates’ soundbite du jour, and a little more time covering what the candidates do, and why they do it. ÂÂ
Rosen’s PressThink summary concludes with a recommendation of Zack Exley’s piece on the Clinton camp’s ground game in Nevada. Thus, I am somewhat surprised that he does not identify the general failure of the press to cover the ground game as a major factor underlying many of the herd failures in campaign coverage in this cycle.ÂÂ
In recommending Exley’s piece yesterday, I linked back to show that the herd missed Clinton’s organization as a factor in her New Hamphire win. It is equally true that the herd’s failure to see Mike Huckabee coming in Iowa was due to their failure to understand his non-traditional organization, which I had flagged as far back as last New Year’s Eve.ÂÂ
In short, one way to provide better coverage of presidential campaigns would be to cover the candidates’ campaigns. Zak Exley did it. The Las Vegas Sun did it. Others could follow their example more often.
 P.S. I would also suggest that “the media” might have understood Huckabee’s organization and campaign if more members of “the media” had some significant level of contact with — let alone an an undertanding of — the evangelical community, the home-schooling community or the community of gun-rights groups that form the backbone of Huckabee’s campaign organization.   It is an understanding they lack due to groupthink.
That the New York Times — the epitome of “the media” – decided it had to have a reporter to cover “the conservative beat” should be evidence enough of that groupthink. The icing on the cake is that the reporter the NYT assigned to that beat penned a lengthy piece last October 28th on “The Evangelical Crackup” which largely dismissed Huckabee, despite the fact that his poll numbers had been rising steadily for three months and Sen. Sam Brownback — one of his chief rivals for the evangelical vote — had left the race nine days earlier. For that matter, writing about “The Evangelical Crackup” involves the very sort of over-simplification Rosen disdains with respect to “the media.”
There you go again, Karl. Getting all fact-y on them. Personally, I found the idea that they needed somebody on the “conservative beat” to be the most telling of all. Since they are part and parcel of the liberal beat, it is not needed. However, they need to devote someone to this oddity of nature, and even then, do not even come close to understanding it, as they still describe it like the caricature in their heads.
During one of my attempts at college learnin’, I wrote a paper on this phenomenon. At the time there wasn’t so much media coverage, and reporters got assigned to campaigns, which was a cherry job. If your particular candidate got nominated, you then got to cover him in the general election since you were already familiar with him. This was an even more cherry job, and if your candidate got elected President, you got the White House beat which was the cherriest of all. This naturally would indicate a bit of a bias toward positive news by the beat reporters, which I was sure would explain how Reagan had just got elected. I bemoaned the fact that the only other alternative we seemed to have was “the smoke-filled room”, which quite obviously just wouldn’t do. I was surprised when my professor questioned this notion, I had no real answer but everybody just knew that back room politics by the elites was intolerable.
Now I am fervently praying for a brokered convention. Karma is a bitch, huh?
Rosen is a bright guy, but he’s a fully paid-up member of the group and an active participant in the groupthink you quite correctly describe. Furthermore, he is a journalism professor, and neither he nor his commenters can imagine any possible approach to the matter other than a slight tweaking of journalists’ education. The self-righteous, self-congratulatory “Fourth Estate”/”Speak Truth to Power” notion has become so embedded that it has passed beyond dogma and become proprioception; to them, imagining doing without it is very like imagining life as a paraplegic.
Journalism has made itself useless by going down that road. It cannot speak truth to power because it cannot reliably identify either power or truth; to the people it putatively supports it’s boring because it produces nothing but repetitiveness, and its practitioners are so self-isolated that they cannot attack their supposed enemies — they don’t understand their targets well enough to know where to hit. Why should anybody buy the paper?
Regards,
Ric
Again, great writing Karl. Two things though that I naturally disagree with is the notion that the MSM ( a herd thinking notion in itself) is “liberal” because reporters tend to be “liberal”. The same corollary in contrast is that most owners of “media” are conservative. Thus the “liberal” insecure, generally lower paid “journalists” are more than offset by the need for advertizing dollars and constraint by the more conservative editors and owners. That’s a general poli-sci stat from the past. If anything, the media is more conservative now than then. NYTimes has allowed many substantial conservatives to grace it’s pages…maybe even a majority (that’s just a rough estimate). And judging from conservatives railing against the NYTimes, most other newspapers and such are more conservative.
I am glad we both were excited by the Huckabee factor early as he’s a sort of interesting anomaly. An economic populist conservative….. maybe a oxymoron. But you say his organization is a big factor. In contrast, I think his substantial charm and uniqueness is a bigger factor. I suspect we both agree that he may not have the staying power to get anywhere near the Presidency. (I think the general public will not buy into him due to some of his more extreme conservative positions ..even Republicans aren’t likely to jump on the national sales tax idea but he could back off that one..) ….but surprises do happen.
I feel that Fred’s going away too with his suggestions that the public should dramatically rid themselves of employer-based health insurance…(he stated an interesting stat that only 17 million Americans have health insurance directly from insurers while the vast majority get it from their work (and govt.). I’d like the de-linking of work from insurance too but not in the privatized manner of throwing people into forced payments to profiteering hidden-fee hucksters.
Not to be negative or anything. Just to juice up the debate.
These were the same “independent minds” who got together to coach John Kerry on how to work with them in the last election, yes?
OT to Happyfeet: Doggin’ me for working up a Carne Asada recipe on Saturday, eh? Metrosexual, huh? Well if that makes me a Nellie-boy then I proudly accept it… since I’ve , uh, been Roberto’s bitch for years anyway.. I’ve been a stone addict since Roberto gave me that first big beef burrito injection back in the 70’s.. It was soooo satisfying I didnt even need a reach around.. I may be burritoless in Seattle at this point but even after 15 years I cant shake that monkey off my back.
The same corollary in contrast is that most owners of “media†are conservative.
Somewhere, Ted Turner and Little Pinch Sulzberger are laughing…
If anything, the media is more conservative now than then. NYTimes has allowed many substantial conservatives to grace it’s pages…maybe even a majority (that’s just a rough estimate).
What an absolute howler. Brooks and Kristol’s columns outweigh all of the other columnists and allegedly objective reporting? Good Allah …
(I think the general public will not buy into him due to some of his more extreme conservative positions ..
Again, the mind boggles …
Another factor that the MSM refuse to admit sincerely is that they are primarily entertainment. Just like happens in sports, no matter how pure you intentions initially, there is a threshold that requires your industry to become ratings driven. That drives you toward a populist position by necessity.
I need to refresh more often,
“Thus the “liberal†insecure, generally lower paid “journalists†are more than offset by the need for advertizing dollars and constraint by the more conservative editors and owners. That’s a general poli-sci stat from the past.”
I will try to keep this really simple: You get advertising dollars by attracting more readers, you attract more readers by sensationalism and pandering to popular tastes, which the very essence of populism. A successful, mass market media outlet is required to be populist by definition.
I’ll go you one better B Moe, (or I’ll go you one different. I rarely if ever achieve “better”)
Take the perceived leanings out of the equation. The media thrive on disaster. Be it collapsing buildings or hooking a man up to a lie detector and asking him if he’d squeeze a big pair of strange boobs if he knew his wife wouldn’t find out (with his wife sitting right there waiting for the answer). BTW the answer is “YES” . Why? Because if you’re asked that question, you’re automatically going to be thinking about huge jugs. Your heart rate increases and you trip the lie detector. If you say no, lie detector trips (hooter-thoughts) and you’re a divorced liar. Your wife asks why you answered yes, you answer, “Honey, my buddies were watching. You want them to think you’re married to a shirtlifter?”
But I digress. I truly believe that the media want constant anarchy and couldn’t care less about what’s good for the country. Pitch the TV’s. Stop the paper.
Shirtlifter !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
“The same corollary in contrast is that most owners of “media†are conservative.”
datadave spews what is conventional wisdom for many on the left. It’s such conventional wisdom that I have never seen any support for the statement.
Got anything datadave?
That’s a general poli-sci stat from the past.
Unsourced as usual.
as an addendum to B Moe’s post, let’s recall Ass. Press’ commitment to All Things Brittany.
datelessdave, the owner of the newspaper (usually a corporation) wants $$$ and rarely interfers with editors as long as the ad revenue rolls in. So editors can (and do) indulge their own, and their reporters, prejudices just to the point where it turns off the buying public. They run their partisanship not necessarly by slamming conservatives directly but by selective omission.
Funny, isn’t it, that the NYTimes runs story after story after reams of column inches on Abu Gharib or Running Amok in America: Beserker Returning Vets, yet cannot find room to run stores of heroism or medal winners (:::cough::: Michael Murphy :::cough:::). Really supports your assertion that the NYTimes is conservative, eh, double D?
B moe… but it is private enterprise and competition that fires the so-called MSM. ‘Reporters’ are temp workers in general until they get tenure by a little brown-nosing. And they tend to be in that benighted “liberal elite” of Rove’s disdain. But editors and owners have also been polled as being more ‘conservative’ than ‘reporters’..so thus the “liberal” media sounds to me like an ‘urban myth’ or more precisely a ‘rural myth’, judging from the red state/blue state divide(?. Maybe you are arguing that the media is ‘classically liberal? (in modern parlance, “Liberal” means “Leftist” vs. Conservative is all of the other ‘ism’s’ out there….thus the MSM gives conservatism a huge bonus of a majority of popular support.. With apologies to classical liberals, as we ‘radicals’ (although I am pretty moderate mostly but advocate radical solutions to health care and insurance fraud, also are forced into the “liberal” camp by MSM’s buying into the extremist rhetoric of the Right that claims McCain is a “communist” for example. I went to Polico.com and noted that wacko’s were calling McCain worst things than ‘communist’. Such rhetoric does push the media more to the right…but could eventually lead to a backlash.
Fox Network for example was innovative as well as conservative and pushed the media to the right if anything. And Ted Turner helped pave the way with the popularity of cable tv.
“Populism” also isn’t necessarily “left” or “right” as our previous discussions about ‘fascism’ implied. Fascism tends to be “populist” in mimic-ing ‘socialism’ for example. CNN has noted conservatives on it’s ‘talking head’ shows. Turner is a uber capitalist. But I doubt you’ll find owners of the media promoting a ‘socialist’ agenda anytime soon. Hey, look how much (positive) media either Kuchinich (sp?) or Bernie Sanders both get considering they are Congressmen getting huge landslides in contested elections. They are treated as tainted anomalies. Even if they have won overwhelming landslides eclipsing anything Mainstream candidates have ever done and generally have done it in what were ‘conservative’ districts. (Vermont was long a Republican district and has currently a popular long term Republican governor. K. comes from a ‘conservative’ group of Cleveland ethnic groupings who weren’t too enamored with black ‘welfare queens’ (as linked to me by a PW linker) but they like the former boy mayor for his “leftist” fighting spirit….but obviously he gets no respect in the MSM. (maybe for good reasons as to his past mistakes perhaps.). And remember how harshly the MSM dealt with Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. Reagan and the Bush’s got relatively better press. Of course, Bill’s being a trouser-snake didn’t help.
DD
please give an example of the NYTimes or LATimes “pushed to the right.” Source your assertions, quit attempting to “prove” your assertions with nothing more than more assertions.
IMO you don’t seem to know the first thing about the newspaper biz.
Ouroboros that was wrong. It was just wrong. I looked for you here all weekend so I could take that back because it mostly just sprang from working with liberal foodies – all last week they kept bringing different ceviches with attendant conversation and foodie talk … since the writer’s strike kicked in foodie talk has exploded cause tv talk has dried up and they need something else vapid and safe to sound clever about. It’s not your fault.
“But I doubt you’ll find owners of the media promoting a ’socialist’ agenda anytime soon.”
I doubt you could find your ass if your head weren’t up it, dave.
“In addition to giving millions of dollars to leftist causes, Turner has contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to such political figures as Cynthia McKinney, John Kerry, Tom Daschle, Paul Wellstone, Max Cleland, Patty Murray, Bill Clinton, and Barbara Boxer. Turner explains his generosity to leftist causes and politicians by candidly stating, “I’m a socialist at heart.”
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2004
Either make a real point and defend it, or shut the fuck up. Your mindless gibberish is getting really old.
datadave,
Huckabee’s likability is most definitely a factor in his success. I intend to do a post at some point on the subject generally, not just as to Hucakbee. My point here (and earlier) is that “the media” tended to dismiss his chances in Iowa on the ground that he did not have an organization, when he did — it just was not one “the media” had much knowledge of. The failure was doubly stupid insofar as (if you want to talk old poli sci) Pat Robertson came in second against neighbor Bob Dole and beat GHWBush in Iowa in 1988 with a more primitive version of this model.
As for “the media” being liberal, the Left notion that ownership dictates content is laughable. Indeed, most newsrooms are fiercely proud of being insulated from the business side of things. Fox is not perceived as conservative because Murdoch owns it, but because of how it is staffed at the editorial level and on down.
Indeed, as in politics generally, political bias is generally a matter of perception. Perceived bias is often a function of where one sits on the spectrum. In this regard, there are legions of studies and surveys showing that: (1) journalists self-identifiy as more liberal than conservative by a wide margin; (2) journalists surveyed hold views on individual issues that are more to the Left than the general public; (3) the general public routinely identifies most media (excluding Fox) as liberal. Liberals often ignore this mountain of data, but that is not very reality-based.
DD “proves” his “points” by putting these “quote marks” around key words. He doesn’t need so-called “sources.”
I don;t think we’ve talked about this here but damn if the blind squirrel didn’t find a nut.
More here from today.
The basis of my point, Karl, is I don’t think major media is leftist because the journalists are leftist as much as the journalists are leftist because the major media is leftist. In other words journalists with anything other than a leftist bent aren’t going to produce the ratings necessary to survive.
Let’s consider the story of Chicken Little. Chicken Little comes running into town proclaiming the sky is falling. The word start spreading on the street, so the town reporter, the king and the wizard all hear about it. Things have been slow, not much news to sell or wizardry jobs being commissioned, so the king sends the wizard and the reporter out to investigate. Chicken Little shows the wizard where it happened, under the apple tree, and the wizard and reporter laugh at him, tell him an apple fell on his head. Chicken Little points out there is no apple, and they point out a herd of nearby deer, eating apples from under other trees, and walk back to town. The wizard reports to the king, and goes back to being unemployed, the reporter’s headlines read “King Declares Sky is NOT Falling”, people laugh at the headlines without buying it and declare the king Captain Obvious. The wizard is unemployed, no one is buying papers, and the king is a laughing stock. Now let’s posit another ending:
Chicken Little shows them where the sky fell, the wizard notes it is under an apple tree, but there aren’t any apples on the ground. The wizard notes the nearby deer herd, but points out they aren’t eating apples at the present. They report their findings to the king as inconclusive and troubling. The king commissions the wizard to investigate further, the headlines read “Sky May Be Falling: King is Investigating”, and the papers start flying off the rack. So the wizard has a job, the reporter is making more money, and the king’s ratings soar.
Sorry for the length, but I find it easier to explain this way.
b moe. u’re such an indoctrinated asswipe. Can you engage in open discussion, ever?
read something that doesn’t presuppose your already narrow-minded views. When anything suggesting an alternative viewpoint appears you can’t defend but just indulge in hyperbolic cuss’n. Note, that all the conservative studies of media bias are done by ‘conservative’ think tanks….which seems to be the case in the unpolitical, anti-, Weasel word Wikipedia says. But you want only Conservawiki propaganda, B moan.
Turner’s just playing you suckers to keep a balance so as he said…they’ll be a “backlash” against us billionaires if Conservatives get all their way: more and more economic imbalance. He said, “They’ll hang us from the lampposts.” That’s his reasoning for being “liberal”, but remember his “Red, White, and Blue” captain America past?. He got his billions and maybe he wants to keep them by keeping the discussion away from his money and on the Republicans who only know how to make money by using political influence thus Blackwater, Carlye (Bush 1’s military complex with Arab influence. Republicans in general can’t compete on a level playing field, they have to use the government to enrich themselves thus unethical banking practices, no bid contracts, and other ways to use the current Administration to make money. Ensuring Republican Oil wealth esp. by limiting discussion and investment into alternative energy.
Mark Halperin is a conservative for example who gets lots of NYTimes coverage. William Saffire is a long time Icon of the Right, and the NYTimes made him. Darleen.
the study of republican loyalties of media owners was done 4 decades ago and unlinked but in my poli sci texts of the 70s. And it makes sense. reporters=generally democratic, owners and editors=generally republican. the owner of the only state wide paper in my state is Republican and is part of the Gannett Group. That’s a huge segment of the media.. the Gannett group.. but you’ll focus on the relatively small readership of the NYTimes.. .(except their excellent website maybe has millions more).
who is more well known? O’Reilly, Limbaugh, Hannity or Eric Alterman or even Paul Krugman . or David Brock? Many more people know the conservatives listed above. Correct? do you need to debate that one? Conservative media figures are much better known to the public.
sorry for indulging in ‘name-calling’ I’ll leave JD and B moan to do that.
“If anything, the media is more conservative now than then.”
Kudos to DataDave for nailing it.
Reporters used to be bottom tier payroll, and their street beats often
placed them front and center with the smarmy side of life. Consequently, those with conscience, seeing the plight of the little guy made them socially aware that such needed advocacy. Hence the ancient relics of the craft became decidedly more liberal.
Those were the old days.
Now they are upper-crusters whose main concern is maintaining their up-scale lifestyles. In order to maintain that status-quo, they must snuggle with the rich and powerful so that information is not denied them.
As for their broad-beamed incompetence in reporting the facts, it has always been a ‘speed-to-market’ profession with unforgiving deadlines, white space to fill, and ad revenue dependent.
Hasn’t anyone noticed the tendency for blogs to post inane entries just to keep the traffic brisk?
“b moe. u’re such an indoctrinated asswipe. Can you engage in open discussion, ever?”
So dave,
When your cleaning lady doesn’t put your folded tube-socks in your sock drawer with the big red stripes up, do you hit her on the back of the head with a shovel?
can dave link to supporting “facts”, ever?
“Kudos to DataDave for nailing it.”
“As for their broad-beamed incompetence in reporting the facts, it has always been a ’speed-to-market’ profession with unforgiving deadlines, white space to fill, and ad revenue dependent.”
And in two separate statements within the same comment, Semanticleo shows her acceptance of and advocacy for mediocrity.
hf, I noticed Captain Ed linked only to Judicial Watch’s front page. Their report is the top item but that may not always be so. Here is the link to their report. At the bottom of this page are links to the documents they refer to in .pdf.
More appropriate to other recent PW posts than this one but since you mentioned it here, is this:
As far as I know, no major media outlet is making a similar call. Contrast this with the treatment Obama’s original opponent in his Senate race received regarding documents related to his divorce.
Pointing out that you are an idiot is not name-calling dave, it is stating the obvious. You don’t have even a minimal grasp of what I am talking about, O’Reilly, Hannity, and Limbaugh are fucking talk show hosts, for Christ’s sake. I gave you a direct quote of one of the biggest news moguls in history explaining the reason he has given billions of dollars to leftist causes is because he is a leftist, you dismiss it by declaring the man a liar, then accuse me of being a indoctrinated and dishonest. You are a moron, dave. Quit trying to make a living on your own and go to work for someone smart enough to make sane decisions. You might make enough money to not be so pissed off you spend all your time cowering in a corner, screeching and flinging shit at a world you are too stupid to understand.
[…] to Protein Wisdom homepage « Will the media’s herd mentality be unbroken? [Karl] | Home | January 21, 2008 GOP 2008: Looking for Mr. […]
“Reporters used to be bottom tier payroll, and their street beats often
placed them front and center with the smarmy side of life.
…
Now they are upper-crusters whose main concern is maintaining their up-scale lifestyles. In order to maintain that status-quo, they must snuggle with the rich and powerful so that information is not denied them.”
What comic book did you get that out of? Sounds pretty funny!
Karl, Ok. Should have attended to your’s first as I almost missed it.
I’ll agree. That the world view (a quaint old term, I’ll admit) of the observer of the media leads to the perception of bias of that media on the part of the tobserver.
OK, personal anecdote! A friend who owned a restaurant for decades was a big Rush L. listener and says that NPR is liberally biased. From his viewpoint as an owner of a labor intensive business restricted by health and employment regulations his bias would be understandable. Working 70 hour weeks and only able to pay barely minimum wages while keeping a loyal staff through his kindness and little else, and w/o much education he was easily swayed to a conservative bent. But after 9/11 and the overwhelming ProRepublican exploitation of that event and being able to sell a marginal business for a profit and getting a job with better hours moderated his viewpoints. And maybe a little argument with me helped. Hearing the same things over and over again from conservative pundits such as Rush Limbaugh has overwhelmed people to get a more balanced viewpoint. People are getting bored of the same conservative rants over and over again. The wiki article shows a ‘centrist’ bias as the rule now IMO.
I read here to learn not just debate my admittedly minority viewpoint. The Info about Huckabee’s organization is important and noteworthy. Church-based political activism is a huge factor and perhaps for the good. I’ll give ’em the benefit of the doubt….as to not being of that constituency.
Trying to read more, type less, read more, type less.
I’ll try to understand the anti-McCain viewpoint but I doubt it’s ‘church-based’. It seems to come from the economic conservative faction mostly.
n order to maintain that status-quo, they must snuggle with the rich and powerful so that information is not denied them.â€Â
And … how, exactly, does the rich and powerful deny them information?
“What comic book did you get that out of? Sounds pretty funny!”
De docta ignorantia.
“…the world view (a quaint old term, I’ll admit)…”
What is your opinion of shipping containers as military transports?
whew.. blowing right over me. Most those shipping containers I see are going to China and back. Our military’s in ’em? Some kind of Trojan horse?
enlighten me, wise one.
“Now they are upper-crusters whose main concern is maintaining their up-scale lifestyles.”
I would be concerned with trying to maintain an up-scale lifestyle on 35k, I must admit. I hope all that snuggling is not pro bono.
http://tinyurl.com/yubjvn
how so?
Republicans in general can’t compete on a level playing field, they have to use the government to enrich themselves thus unethical banking practices, no bid contracts, and other ways to use the current Administration to make money. Ensuring Republican Oil wealth esp. by limiting discussion and investment into alternative energy
It never takes long for idiotboy to fall into the conspiracy theories. Through in the words BLackwater and Carlyle Group and booga booga ….
datalessdave – When SemenKKKleo is agreeing with you, you know you have reached rock bottom.
Homework assignment for datadave and Miss Cleo. From the world of academia, right smack dab in the city of LA, UCLA did a study on media bias. Go find it, read it for comprehension, and come back here and admit how fucking dumb you are.
“It never takes long for idiotboy to fall into the conspiracy theories.”
A conspiracy against him is the only explanation for how someone so brilliant could not be successful, JD. It can’t be because he is wrong.
WTF is reporter II?
Is that average median or mean?
Do you have any experience in journalism? Do you know any journalists?
Try getting out more.
“WTF is reporter II?”
Read the link, idiot, it explains it all and gives detailed salary ranges for all levels of reporters. Do some goddamn research for a change, I know plenty or reporters, print, radio and local TV. The idea that any of them are rich is preposterous, unless you consider anything above minimum wage rich, which now that I think of it you just might.
II stands for 2, Miss Cleo.
The first page of the link states that it is a mean average, gives the upper and lower limits, and a detailed job description. How does it feel to be too stupid to troll, cleo?
My sympathies, B Moe. You’re trying to engage with, not one, but two disingenuous fucking morons. Good luck with that.
And I was a journalism major for one semester, cleo. I got tired of all the business and marketing bullshit and switched to Poli-Sci/History with an English Minor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias_in_the_United_States
the article “media bias” is heavily contested but this one isn’t, much pro and con but I select the FAIR spectrum in said article: A 1998 study from FAIR found that journalists are “mostly centrist in their political orientation”;[32] 30% considered themselves to the left on social issues compared to 9% on the right, while 11% considered themselves to the left on economic issues compared to 19% on the right. The report explained that since journalists considered themselves to be centrists, “perhaps this is why an earlier survey found that they tended to vote for Bill Clinton in large numbers.” FAIR uses this study to support the claim that media bias is propagated down from the management, and that individual journalists are relatively neutral in their work.
I know, most here probably disdain FAIR but IMO it matches ‘reality-based’ observations. But the whole concept of liberal media bias must be credited to:
“Nixon’s Vice-President Spiro Agnew attacked the media in a series of speeches–two of the most famous having been written by White House aides Patrick Buchanan and William Safire–as “elitist” and “liberal.”[20]”
ya see…it’s part of that ‘conservative domination’ for the last 40 years that I’ve been railing about. Ranting about, typing about…..homeschooling about. Me too. We’re all homeschoolers now. Just kidding, for carin’s sake, whomever, maggie. If you were mollie, I’d think you were this famous vegetarian : http://www.molliekatzen.com/
but that might be verbotten at PW.
you gotta admit conservatopia is pretty lame.
the “one worlders” are sneaking into the USA via shipping containers? Mao’s blue ants””my paranoia is growing….help, b moan!
Last time I recall Jay Rosen focused on what the press should cover, he included comments from a small-market newspaper editor that the press should spend its time figuring out what catastrophe GWB is going to engineer to avoid giving up office on January 20, 2008. Those comments are gone now, because Jay said he inadvertently closed comments on his blog and then deleted many comments in recovering them.
In short, Jay Rosen, IMHO, thinks a press that is doing its job would have taken GWB out by now. Every other theory he comes up with stems from that line of thinking.
I agree completely with alppu’s comment #11.
Incidentally, this is why journalist self-identification of left/right is not the be-all, end-all measure of bias. When journalists are surveyed regarding concrete issues, they almost always skew left.
u gave us a crappy link…better check it. tinyurl indeed
so you can discount studies done by “conservative think tanks” (according to ??) while “self described progressive media watchgroup” FAIR is, um, okay? noooo confirmation bias there. oh well. it’s cold and dark here today, think I’m gonna crawl back into bed and read some better written fiction.
prior message to b moe. damn, maybe I just read too much. unpaid holiday, self employed and all.
“You’re trying to engage with, not one, but two disingenuous fucking morons. Good luck with that.”
Calling it engaging is being kind to the fucking morons. I am really bored today and trying to shame them into silence. I realize it is pointless, put it helps pass the time.
I agree completely with alppu’s comment #11. And the way to accomplish about 50% of the paper-stopping would be to move obituaries online. Why the hell in all the net bubble no one exploited that niche I have no idea, but it’s the third leg of a three-legged stool.
maggie, the wiki article had mostly conservative think tank derived articles….but I do see a trend of financed-studies coming from the whole conservative project of damning any critical analysis as “liberal bias”. It’s just Historic.
I don’t expect you to see my viewpoint in 12 steps or less.
don’t be bored: http://www.fabprefab.com/fabfiles/containerbayhome.htm
yes, BlackWater puts their mercenaries in shipping containers in the middle of the Green Zone. I am trying to help you, B Moan.
Jaysus F**king Keerist!!!! DatelessDave and CluelessCleo…the sourcesless tagteam trolls
ATTENTION you idiotarians…”wiki” is source with more than a few problems. You want some actual serious research done by a university? How about UCLA???
Now, qualitatively refute that study, you two bloviating twatwaffles, or shut the fuck up!
/rant
[…] Protein Wisdom has a terrific piece on media groupthink. Here’s a taste: That the New York Times  the epitome of “the media†– decided it had to have a reporter to cover “the conservative beat†should be evidence enough of that groupthink. The icing on the cake is that the reporter the NYT assigned to that beat penned a lengthy piece last October 28th on “The Evangelical Crackup†which largely dismissed Huckabee, despite the fact that his poll numbers had been rising steadily for three months and Sen. Sam Brownback  one of his chief rivals for the evangelical vote  had left the race nine days earlier. For that matter, writing about “The Evangelical Crackup†involves the very sort of over-simplification Rosen disdains with respect to “the media.†Media BiasWOULD YA BUY ME A COFFEE? Click here to donate via PayPal. Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. […]
The shipping container snark was a joke of the regulars, dave. The last poster we had who professed the obsolescence of a world view believed the greatest threat to this country was an invasion by China using shipping containers. I thought you might be related. You can stop obsessing about it now, hopefully.
“…surveys have shown that reporters tend to vote more Democrat…”
Good stuff, Darleen, but until we make these pinheads understand that Limbaugh and Hannity aren’t reporters it is only going to confuse the little darlings.
“I agree completely with alppu’s comment #11.”
MayBee, happyfeet,
We are now officially a hive.
MayBee,
Is your body in Michigan at this time and if so, how is the weather? I have to travel up there this week. If you’re not there currently, I’ll take your guess as fact – unforgiving deadlines and all.
Self identification is some kind of important signifier now, datadave? They can call themselves centrists, balanced, unbiased, etc … from now until the end of time, and that will not make it so. They still actively and objectively vote for Dem candidates at rates higher than the general population, and espouse policy positions to the left of the general population. That they may be to the right of you says more about you. It says nothing about where the media is on the political spectrum.
datadave – UCLA does not skew right, or even skew center. How would you explain their findings?
at least you Linked Darleen. thx. OK. By limiting the “media” to only “news reporting” but excluding Pundits you might have a point. But a seeming majority of ‘news’ is given to the public by mainly conservative pundits. Your study neglects that. And kudos to Public Broadcasting for being the most ‘centrist’ of the bunch according to your cited study. Which utterly refutes the conservative arguments that Public media is “Liberal”. Popular pundits who are mainly conservative: That’s also ‘media’. c apish ?
reporters? we should shoot ’em? of course they are more Democratic. It’s an ‘intellectual’ thing. Probably a lot of ’em have liberal arts degrees too. Evil!
what a reporter writes or thinks isn’t what usually gets broadcast btw. If he or she wants to eat. That’s reality-based and just plain logical.
and a very thorough criticism of what I perceived a very shallow political study of the media: http://www.brendan-nyhan.com/blog/2005/12/the_problems_wi.html
and http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/004006.php
and worst of all your professor self censors his own cv: http://www.polisci.ucla.edu/people/faculty-pages/timothy-groseclose
grasping at straws…like the global warming denialists. Find one associate professor in the whole nation that supports your views and then Magnify it. Is that your strategy, darleen? As comparison, notice that the short list of scientists saying that man-made global warming doesn’t exist is growing shorter and most them have now distanced themselves from the faith-based anti Science community sticking their heads in the sand.
I would love to see a link supporting that claim!
Don’t like Darleen’s study? How about this one?
NPR’s audience is overwhelmingly liberal, and these are the people their stations have to beg from cause they can’t live within the means of their government welfare. You do the math.
But a seeming majority of ‘news’ is given to the public by mainly conservative pundits.
How do you type this drivel without pissing yourself from laughter?
The idea that the study refutes that public broadcasting is not liberal could not be more wrong. Had you said it showed that it was less liberal than its fellow travelers, you would have been correct, but that is a foreign concept for you.
reporters? we should shoot ‘em? of course they are more Democratic. It’s an ‘intellectual’ thing ,/i>
This is just rich.
Since you disagree with it, it must be shallow, huh, idiotdave? Since your content has proven to be neither vast, nor deep, from what do you make that conclusion?
MayBee,
Is your body in Michigan at this time and if so, how is the weather? I have to travel up there this week. If you’re not there currently, I’ll take your guess as fact – unforgiving deadlines and all.
I’m in Michigan right now, and it’s fucking freezing. 8 degrees when I woke up. It’s all the way up to 18 now. I have no clue what the wind chill might be, because I’m not stupid enough to go outside.
at least you Linked Darleen. thx. OK. By limiting the “media†to only “news reporting†but excluding Pundits you might have a point. But a seeming majority of ‘news’ is given to the public by mainly conservative pundits.
I don’t know a single liberal who listens to conservative pundits. I know conservatives who don’t care for, or listen to, conservative pundits.
“I’m in Michigan right now, and it’s fucking freezing. 8 degrees when I woke up. It’s all the way up to 18 now. I have no clue what the wind chill might be, because I’m not stupid enough to go outside.”
Thanks for the 411 Carin.
*note to self: Richard Simmons tank-top and short-shorts are out for Michigan trip.*
“my” professor…”MY”??? Professor????
double d…how the hell do your dress yourself in the morning? What with having to change so often after drooling all over yourself.
b moe. thanks for the info. Hmm, I was on to something remembering where Blackwater puts the ‘troops’. They sun themselves on top of the shipping containers naked which pissed off the reality-based military girl heli pilots: gotta keep the tan.
funny, though. Seeing shipping ‘tainers on a train winding through a desolate spot of Wyoming I noticed they were Asian containers, all of them, and the contrast with the locale seemed ominous. Middle of ‘raggedy-ass’ Cowboy Wyoming and enjoying the view and this roll of Asian shipping containers comes up beside me up a rise and slowly passing like a ship. Somehow the irony of it all perplexed me. I’d be happy with a wood framed house with a garden in the middle of no where and instead I see these shipping containers come into sight. Maybe figuratively that guy had a point about the invasion.
Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com, is a grade-A tool, while we’re on the subject of the media.
MayBee,
Is your body in Michigan at this time and if so, how is the weather? I have to travel up there this week. If you’re not there currently, I’ll take your guess as fact – unforgiving deadlines and all.
As usual, I let Carin say the smart, informative thing.
My body is currently in LA, where your Richard Simmons tank top and shorts would always be appropriate.
MayBee,
Is your body in Michigan at this time and if so, how is the weather? I have to travel up there this week. If you’re not there currently, I’ll take your guess as fact – unforgiving deadlines and all.
And kudos to Public Broadcasting for being the most ‘centrist’ of the bunch according to your cited study. Which utterly refutes the conservative arguments that Public media is “Liberalâ€Â. Popular pundits who are mainly conservative: That’s also ‘media’. c apish ?
Uhm … it didn’t utterly refute that. It said that it’s new was a lot LESS biased than people thought. It still leaned left. But, of course, that refers only to it’s news coverage; which accounts for how many hours out of the day? Have you listened to the Diane Rhem show? Tavis Smiley? I enjoy NPR – especially the little vignettes they do on the weekends. But, it is liberal.
OOps! I went cut and paste crazy!
Datadave:
was on to something remembering where Blackwater puts the ‘troops’. They sun themselves on top of the shipping containers naked which pissed off the reality-based military girl heli pilots
Oh, I sooooo doubt that pissed off any girls.
No offense but the cold’s not so bad these days. We used to get minus 20 for two weeks every winter. Now, we get this rare 8 degrees crap and not enough snow to survive the frequent mid winter thaws. Sorry, it’s anecdotal. But here it from everywhere. So it’s hard to buy Michael Crichton’s and Ann Coulter’s hooey about global warming: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/27/opinion/27doran.html?ex=1154145600&en=d6eb1f5b37877b00&ei=5070
so might tim grosegrove feel about his data being used for political purposes. I don’t know if he has an agenda but probably doesn’t want to be amplified to the extent here.
How would he feel? I think he would be shocked, shocked I tell you, to find out that a study about political bias in the media was used to demonstrate political bias in the media.
maybee that was just a memory of an article in the NYTimes about blackwater…thus anecdotal. There is a lot of resentment of the mercenary folks by the low paid risk taking real military. I’ve heard it myself from returnees from the ‘sandbox’. Those blackwater, dynasaurs, etc. have to get bailed out often for the inciting the iraqis to self protection and violence and the fact that the ‘cowboys’ get paid a grand a day or more really gets under the skin of troops who are taking the bulk of casulties for far less money. I hear the Republican percentage of the military is trending down esp. with Bush et al cutting hiring bonuses for people who get wounded in action who thus can’t finish their bonus term in service.
No offense, but the temperature is NORMAL here. A little low actually – since we only reached a high of 18 and the average high is 29. The record high was way back in 1965. I don’t know where you lived to get minus 20 for two weeks every winter, but that isn’t normal for this part of Michigan.
As for snow … it seems like a pretty average year for that as well.
I think Double-D should change his name to anecdotaldave.
So, as per item #78, DD’s the one who can’t use HTML or TinyUrl so as not to mess up the page’s presentation. His knuckleheaded-ness knows few bounds.
Back to calling them mercenaries. You are such a toad. You may hear such things, but that does not make them true, anecdote maker-upper. lol. Care to pull any more shit from your ass, or are you getting sore yet?
I listen. But I most limit it to about 15 minutes to prevent apoplexy. Rush used to be fairly funny when he was new and different.
Karl. Yeah, I begrudgingly say that American’s tend to be conservative..thus they see the media as negative in that it might occasionally smite that conservative “world view”. A conservative people will tend to dislike news that doesn’t fit their conservative wishes.
Like there are poor people? We don’t to know that.
Gay people? Disgusting.
Vietnam war era long-haired protesters? Yikes, let the Chicago police deal with that.
Anyway, obviously, the various studies on media bias have a hard time isolating stable datum to compare with.
must limit..sorry
I love the trolls who cannot understand the difference between questioning whether or not there is actual warming, and questioning whether said warming is a result of a natural cycle, or is the result of the machinations of those pesky humans in warming up the earth.
Like there are poor people? We don’t to know that. OF course I know that. Who do you think cleans my floors? If it weren’t for poor people, I would have to do that kinda stuff myself.
Gay people? Disgusting. That’s why most of us here at PW keep a few of ’em locked up in the basement. Keeps ’em off the streets where they could convert our children to their sinful ways.
Vietnam war era long-haired protesters? Yikes, let the Chicago police deal with that.
Well, let’s face it. They prolly smell. And, no doubt are crazy from all the baby-killing they did back in ‘Nam.
Damn, dave is industrial grade batshit crazy. Carin, I dubbed that kook that last time he was using anecdotes left and right in direct opposition to his PW handle. I doubt he really sees the irony, though.
i note group think o.i. just didn’t mention it
funny carin. i was tic.
JD: Were you responsible for posting the ad that said, “Long winded, conspiratorial minded, grammer challenged, incoherent troll wanted. Will serve mini weiners a Crystal Light.”
Because while dataless dave “experiences” a headache is forming…
Obsteperous – Loonwaffles like datelessdave are impervious to facts, and apparently irony as well.
Nonetheless, decades worth of studies pointing in one direction might suggest a trend.
I am also always cheered when the point in the discussion comes in which the ostensible liberal subtly impugns the intellect of his fellow citizens. It shows a great commitment to the principles of a democratic republic.
I would just expect PW to have a higher quality ideological adversary (could be a troll or not, depending if they’re an asshole or not), or hell, even devil’s advocate. But, Jeff G, who is brilliant, gets loons like dd and semanticpussycat. These trolls absolutely are pointless. The only one that I read with anticipation is SEK. And I don’t think of him as a “troll” at all. Jeff deserves better!
Karl, and Dan, I don’t mean to slight either of you, as it is your posts that these lightweights are scurrying out of their holes for, but it’s Jeff’s place.
I miss SEK. I hope he’s doing well. Also, he’s a gonna be somebody some day, that one.
JD! HOLY batshit. YOU are admitting that just maybe, global warming ?could? be caused by humanoids whose population growth and consumption patterns more and more emulate Lemmings?
nice article about lemmings. Disney besmirched them. They do not commit mass suicide, just have strong biological forces……leading to invading iraq and jumping off cliffs.
Swedish krona=SEK
No, goofball.. SEK = this. Right now he’s talking about Goldberg’s book. You can go over there but don’t say anything cause they’re exponentially smarter than you are and it won’t go like you think.
For sure don’t tell him I sent you either.
Heh. Dogmadave going to SEK’s blog makes me think of that redshirt on Star Trek who got in the way of M5’s power beam when it wanted to tap the warp engines. A puff of smoke and…!
Dave. Did you ever answer my question?
Ah. Here it is;
“#
Comment by datadave on 1/20 @ 5:34 pm #
Rusty, hey, it’s a dumb question. what do you want me to say? birds and bees? chicken or the egg. it’s like where’s air from? not appropriate to the li’l topic here.
Wealth to a cow or a horse? oats and hay and lots of green pasture? Wealth to people: people: silver, gold, tools, land? it’s relative. I’m guessing the proper Authoritative answer is das Kapital eh? but then that could be human capital vs. monetary capital….so on and so on. this thread’s getting bare anyway. So I didn’t have time for the ?. sorry.”
Dave. If you don’t know the answer, it’s OK to say “I don’t know the answer”. No one will think any less of you.
LOL…No doubt, happy. You might have a bounty on your head for that. That is, if SEK, was that kind of guy. I would, but then again, I’m a war mongering, earth heating, minority killing neanderthal.
I heard datadave was simon li’s wingman at the bar where the Bangles had their reunion concert. I heard a good time was had by none.
“No one will think any less of you.”
Rusty, I don’t think that is possible, do you?
If he knew what she wants he’d be giving it to her…
ok, Rusty let’s hear some Alan Greenspan shit or Ayn Rand shit? about wealth creation.
thx for the Kaufman link Happy….sort of heavy handed prose artist I see. Jew this, jew that why does he get so Semitic? Wasteing time on Jonah Goldberg isn’t too impressive. How about Confessions of a Political Hitman
Are conservatives happy that the French markets are the lowest losers of the low markets today according to NPR.
I want my pearls back.
I beg to differ. Scott’s a bright guy, but there’s a fair amount of bone stupid going on in the comments over there. Rich somethingorother and at least another ‘tard or two… DD could probably find some simpatico over there.
“Rusty let’s hear some Alan Greenspan shit or Ayn Rand shit? about wealth creation.”
Didn’t you say you were a carpenter, once, dave? How in the fuck could a carpenter not grasp the concept of wealth creation?
Rich is amazingly tedious. I think it’s sincere though.
Jesus was a carpenter. And Jesus told us the poor would always be with us. Like, QED, dude.
“Jesus told us the poor would always be with us.”
So trying to eliminate poverty makes the baby Jesus cry. Right?
Obstreperous Infidel wrote:
No offense taken. However, the main reason for troll influx has been Sphere. CNN’s Election Center uses it, as does CBS News and others to automatically link to related blog content.
Frankly, I have not been above timing election related posts so as to land them on CNN (CBS uses the tech differently) to bring in referral traffic while Jeff is on quasi-hiatus. I have not been above picking the sources for posts from those at Memeorandum to ensure posts pop up there to generate referrals.
For that matter I have not been above posts targeting Sullivan, Ellers and even Ron Paul for much the same reason. Same with posts on media bias, when you get down to it. If trolls want to put money in Jeff’s pocket, so be it.
– “[W]hen anything suggesting an alternative viewpoint appears you can’t defend but just indulge in hyperbolic cuss’n.
– When pigs fly out of My ass, I’ll teach them to ice skate and play the tuba.
– Once again a Li’burul fundie drops a classic piano on his own pointless point.
– Listen up chowder head. You can’t gear yourself for “open minded” reading when the hyperbolic Leftist propeganda litterily oozes out of every sentence and paragraph. Its like telling telling someone who just lost a child in an accident to stop being so opinionated, and remember they have three more kids at home.
– Its pure unadulterated, obfuscating bullshit, ignoring the whole rabid approach of the laim-brained Left-=wing mediots. There is no “alternate viewpoints”. It all Bush hating/anti-war War mongering/anti-Industry/anti-Rich guys class warfare/Race baiting/Male baiting/Identity politics, all of the time.
– If anybody at the NYTrash ever wrote anything of a “balanced” nature, the Eds would probably fire them on the spot.
– But thanks for wasting everyones time. Maybe you should just be content with eating the paste.
By and by, Karl, by and by.
Come Come, now, Neandertals – datadave’s erection has now persisted well beyond Levitra’s penis-salvage time, as he has apparently noticed.
And, Yea, it was written that, “Consequently, those with conscience, seeing the plight of the little guy made them socially aware that such needed advocacy.” And thus was later born the hallowed “proprioception” of anencephaly as well. [PW, #’s 25,3]
Dave. Are you blonde by any chance?
DataDave;
Don’t be offput by the local trollops. They are compelled to proudly display their
intellectual codpiece.
Middle of ‘raggedy-ass’ Cowboy Wyoming and enjoying the view and this roll of Asian shipping containers comes up beside me up a rise and slowly passing like a ship. Somehow the irony of it all perplexed me.
OK, dd, I was going to stay out of this dogfight, but now you’ve pissed me off.
“raggedy-ass”?
If you’re still in Wyoming, please do everyone a favor–either get thee to California where you belong or visit the nearest saloon and regale the regulars with your special brand of idiocy.
I’d pay to see that show.
Sort of. More like, though, that Jesus had the reality of this wealth-creation bit down pat a couple of millenia ago.
Or, alternatively, that even if you do manage to create a lot of wealth, there will still be poor people. Poor people with iPods, though.
For instance, do you realize that a staggering 50% of the people in this country make less than median income?
True fact, I shit you not.
Shameful. I heard Hillary was gonna fix all that.
I can hear you whispering, you know, now that I have an internet connection again. As for all the Jewiness, well, as anyone who’s ever met a self-loathing Jew (or seen a Woody Allen film) knows, it’s all Jew-this and Jew-that with us. We’re a problem, frankly, and I wish some liberal fascists would come along and take care of us already. I mean, like, seriously.
dude, I was a foreman of a crew of two blacks and five chicanos doing carpentry and rod-busting for a Pump station for oil near Rock Springs. We were pouring concrete with temps at 20 below about this time of year. The only union carpenter was the nearly 7 foot tall alcoholic Black guy from Salt Lake City like I was (with his smaller black friend), he was actually mellow but he’s the one who called Wyoming “raggedy-ass”. Cowboy. It fit so well and stayed with me. When we went into the bars of Rock Springs, there were a lot of massive Carhart white guys but no one as big as the only Black dude of substance. So there weren’t any fights and we sort of got along…only because I did the time cards and handed out the checks. But the Mexican guys they eventually won, the boss was sleeping late in his wife’s bed and I took the minority viewpoint in the black vs. chicano wars being the only white. But we were there first, but the Mexicans were cheaper.
happy to see ya, krona.