Today's Seattle Times editorial:
The hoax played against British Broadcasting Corp. Friday is the downside of the Internet: Though it can instantly communicate knowledge and truth, it also can instantly communicate lies.So too can the British BROADCASTING Corporation, which instantly communicated the lie by, uh, BROADCASTING it:
On Friday, the BBC ran an interview with a man who purported to be from Dow Chemical Corp., owners of Union Carbide since 1999. The man said Dow Chemical was taking full responsibility for the disaster and was setting up a $12 billion compensation fund.The downside of the BBC!He was lying, and the BBC apologized for being taken in.
CBS News also instantly communicated a lie by broadcasting the story relying on the forged National Guard memos. But I don't believe the Seattle Times ran any editorials decrying the downside of television. Nor do I recall the Seattle Times ever lamenting the downside of newspaper editorial sections which have also been known to instantly communicate lies on occasion.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at December 06, 2004 02:41 PM | Email ThisAnd counting improper ballots in King County is also OK, as long as they are for Gregoire.
And the liberal hoax that the turkey Bush was holding in Iraq during his surprise vist to the troops in November 2003, was a fake was justified and widely reported because it made Bush look bad.
For more examples, see Farenheit 9/11.
Posted by: Jeff B on December 6, 2004 03:25 PMThe CBS News/National Guard Memo story is the perfect example of Old Media arrogance. "I'm Dan Rather and these memos are genuine because I'm Dan Rather" just isn't going to cut it anymore.
This is not to say Old Media will disappear or that it is inexorably committed to spreading falsehoods. But between bias, laziness and whatever else comes with human nature in a soundbyte world, Old Media alone is no longer up to the job. The blogging revolution won't eliminate Old Media but it certainly will help to redefine its place and its status. Of course, the Old Media have a great deal of power and prestige to lose in the process, so I would expect them to accept it anytime soon.
Posted by: Seth Cooper on December 6, 2004 05:18 PMCome to think of it, should we really expect Old Media to face up to its decline? Can anyone imagine newspaper staff editorials proclaiming the waning influence of their own members and medium? That seems unlikely, to say the least.)
Posted by: Seth Cooper on December 6, 2004 05:26 PMEssentially, liberals, a shrinking minority, will be watching the alphabet networks and reading the MSM, but the growing conservative majority will be getting its info from the internet and specialty cable channels. What one media says will be ignored by the other, and winning elections will come down to simple numbers of committed supporters, not spin on the news cycle.
Remember, if it's not close, they can't cheat. The current flap in Ohio suggests a 2% margin isn't enough, so we better shoot for at least 3% margins from now on.
Posted by: Mad DOg on December 6, 2004 08:01 PM