Media Matters’ Eric Boehlert has a long, well-written and wrongheaded whine about the WaPo paying attention to the likes of Michelle Malkin, whilst ignoring such luminaries as Glenn Greenwald. So, impeccable timing.
Why does the WaPo find rightie bloggers more interesting, apparently? Well, if I were to guess, their fascination may stem from the fact that such people hold positions that are at variance with those commonly held at the WaPo. So, they’re exotic in that sense. And it must be amazing that they continue to . . . existentially to persist.
Or John Aravosis, the progressive activist who runs AMERICAblog and just a few weeks ago forced the candy giant Mars to yank online Snickers ads after Aravosis and others tagged them as anti-gay?
Well, I mean, I . . . I’m just . . . it’s such a breathtaking achievement.
This part is particularly disingenous or clueless:
In January, Malkin experienced a particularly humiliating setback. For months, Malkin had been pushing a far-fetched media “scandal” by accusing the Associated Press of manufacturing a “phony” and “bogus” Iraqi police source who was reporting false stories about the daily carnage inside Baghdad. She claimed the phony AP source proved that all of the AP’s Iraq reporting was suspect. (Malkin and company cling to the notion that the situation in Iraq is not as bad as biased journalists make it out to be.) In January, the Iraqi government confirmed the police source’s existence, thereby ruining Malkin’s press-hating conspiracy theory. (The Post remained silent when Malkin’s Jamil Hussein allegation imploded.)
Sorry, Eric. They still haven’t produced the guy.
UNRELATED: Seixon hangs up his blogging hat. Good times with Larry Johnson will never be so good again. (h/t Sister Toldjah)
UPDATE: I mean, what kind of publication prints something from Angelina Jolie about Darfur, when they could be showcasing Eric Boehlert?
Gotta love how it glosses over the fact that Malkin went to Baghdad and showed that the AP’s reports of the “destruction” of the mosques was full of crap.
Which was the point of the whole controversy in the first place.
Well written? He believes modifying a personal noun with the adjective rightwing automatically refutes the arguments of any interlocutor he attaches it to. This is magical writing.
Yeah. Well, okay, Brett.
Did you know that you lose a dozen IQ points every time you visit Media Matters? That place is a Gordian knot tied in used chewing gum.
Whereas Greenwald? Taffy.
I was thinking more like cotton candy. Or a Blow-Pop.
No, no. That’s Sullivan.
Its not merely clueless when Boehlert claims that Malkin was discredited by the Capt. Hussein scandal. Its a clear lie. To the contrary, the Associated Press has been discredited as scores of articles were shown to be sourced to someone they could not produce, (they could only point to someone who did not match their own description of their source and who denied being their source ) and the factual basis for many of those stories completely falsified. The AP only reaction is to silently backtrack on their own stories without acknowledge. The largest wire service has been shown to be a fraud without ethics.
Boehlert is living in a Stalinist alternate reality where if AP airbrushes you from a photo, you didn’t exist.