The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info -----------------------
Last updated on June 10th, 2017 at 05:15 am
Phillip Adams reports:
There’s a prevailing delusion that the unmediated world of the internet is creating a vibrant, electronic democracy—a parallel universe that will reshape political dynamics and counterbalance mainstream media. The other day I asked Bob Carr if he’d noticed the net changing Australian politics and his emphatic response was, “no, not at all”. Despite the strident blogs, the exuberant conspiracy theorists and the new tribalisms of the web, it’s hard to see solid evidence of significant impact. Yet.
Tell it to Eason Jordan, Phil. Let’s flip this notion around, and ask; has any recent Phillip Adams column changed Australian politics? Any “solid evidence of significant impact�? due to the works of Bob Ellis or Alan Ramsey?
No. Not at all.
(Via Boss Hog)
UPDATE. Michael Barone:
So what hath the blogosphere wrought? The left blogosphere has moved the Democrats off to the left, and the right blogosphere has undermined the credibility of the Republicans’ adversaries in Old Media. Both changes help Bush and the Republicans.
A similar deal is happening in Australia, although the left isn’t as influential. Who knows; perhaps Margo’s new site can become our Daily Kos.
UPDATE II. Jonah Goldberg:
The righty blogs have taken down Dan Rather and Eason Jordan. That is big game. The lefty blogs got this Talon news guy. I don’t think this has anything to do with the skills on one side or the other. Give the lefty side credit, they’re smart and they’re tenacious. They’re just as good at digging up old quotes, finding inconsistencies etc. as the guys on the right. In some cases they may even be better. So at that level there’s really no difference. But when it comes to going after the mainstream media they really don’t have the taste for it. Why is that? Well, the obvious reason is that they don’t particularly disagree with the stuff the Dan Rathers and Eason Jordans say or do. Sure they may tear apart a bad poll or criticize a quote out of context if it suits their purposes. But at the end of the day, at the macro level, the fact is that the lefty bloggers and the Mainstream Media are on the same side of things.
UPDATE III. Scott Campbell examines the Jordan-like claims of the BBC’s Nick Gowing—who still has his job.
UPDATE IV. Eason Jordan’s only crime? He cared too much, according to Steve Lovelady, managing editor of the Columbia Journalism Review’s CJR Daily:
The salivating morons who make up the lynch mob prevail. (Where is Jimmy Stewart when we need him?) This convinces me more than ever that Eason Jordan is guilty of one thing, and one thing only—caring for the reporters he sent into battle, and haunted by the fact that not all of them came back. Like Gulliver, he was consumed by Lilliputians.
I am alarmed that Steve Lovelady, managing editor of CJR Daily, is baffled by the uproar over Eason Jordan’s remarks. If this helps, it is because Jordan reportedly accused American soldiers of purposefully murdering journalists, without citing any evidence, and without his news organization having reported it. While he backtracked and claimed he was misunderstood, apparently CNN found his transgression serious enough to accept his resignation.
Read the whole thing.
UPDATE V. Someone posting as William Boykin:
Eason Jordan has just been tire-necklaced by a bloodthirsty group of utopian, bible-thumping knuckledraggers that believe themselves to be bloggers but are really just a streetgang.
Time Warner/CNN is spineless if not completely corrupted by its shareholders’ thirst for petro-dollars.
It is now clear that all pretenses to journalistic ‘objectivity’ benefit the torturing, gulag-building blood-cult known Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld’s Republican Party.