WORLD MEDIA WATCH
Summaries are excerpted from the source articles; the featured article follows the summary section.
I'm open to the idea that newspapers should give much more attention to their "most e-mailed lists." Before reading the article, I wouldn't have been, because I was pretty sure the most e-mailed lists were mainly composed of stories about...[...]
Read The Full Article:
An Iraq redeployment proposal adopted by the House earlier this week received a 53-45 vote in the Senate today, falling short of the 60 needed to advance. The vote “came minutes after the Senate rejected a Republican proposal to pay for the Iraq war without strings attached.”
I really don?t want to devote much time to posting about Barry Bonds and the four-count perjury indictment handed down against him yesterday, but I?m only mentioning this to provide an opportunity to revisit this column about Bonds written by the late, great David Halberstam. As with many people of talent, the author spends a sizeable amount of effort here featuring himself (interesting though Halberstam?s life was), but what he writes about Bonds is typically dead-on accurate.
Someone showed up at the end of the Social Security thread to write this:
While Hillary Clinton got a boost from the debate, one wonders how contrived of a boost it was. As I mentioned in my earlier analysis, the crowd seemed pro-Clinton, and booed at the slightest hint of criticism of her.
The debate questions were also structured in her favor--at least the opening sequence and the final one. The opening question enabled Hillary to get the criticism of her out of the way and allowed her to frame it in the best light. She was prepared to address it, and was prepared to attack Barack for being equally duplicitous, which wasn't exactly the case.
During the debate, Wolf never followed up on Hillary's drivers license immigration stance. Then there was the last question of whether she preferred diamonds or pearls--I mean that just doesn't pass the smell test. That an educated young woman, which the questioner was, would even try get on national TV to ask such a meaningless question boggles my mind. And it should:
Maria Luisa, the UNLV student who asked Hillary Clinton whether she preferred "diamonds or pearls" at last night's debate wrote on her MySpace page this morning that CNN forced her to ask the frilly question instead of a pre-approved query about the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository.I liked the array of topics touched upon during the debate, but CNN clearly bent over backwards to help Hillary. But her campaign couldn't write a better closing question than 'Diamonds or Pearls'. The fix was in after the debate, too, as it featured Clinton confidante James Carville lauding her performance while in the supposed role of an unbiased pundit. Ugh.
"Every single question asked during the debate by the audience had to be approved by CNN," Luisa writes. "I was asked to submit questions including "lighthearted/fun" questions. I submitted more than five questions on issues important to me. I did a policy memo on Yucca Mountain a year ago and was the finalist for the Truman Scholarship. For sure, I thought I would get to ask the Yucca question that was APPROVED by CNN days in advance."
Now, Luisa is getting "swamped" with critical e-mails.
So what happened?
"CNN ran out of time and used me to "close" the debate with the pearls/diamonds question. Seconds later this girl comes up to me and says, "you gave our school a bad reputation.' Well, I had to explain to her that every question from the audience was pre-planned and censored. That's what the media does. See, the media chose what they wanted, not what the people or audience really wanted. That's politics; that's reality. So, if you want to read about real issues important to America--and the whole world, I suggest you pick up a copy of the Economist or the New York Times or some other independent source. If you want me to explain to you how the media works, I am more than happy to do so. But do not judge me or my integrity based on that question."Rivals to Clinton believe that the debate audience had a pro-Clinton tilt. UNLV was responsible for distributing most of the tickets.
I stayed up way too late last night watching the Democratic “debate” on CNN. I have not sat through many of these events, partly because, like Christmas, it just seems like presidential campaign season just comes earlier and earlier every year and all the commercialism is just taking the spirit out of it; and also [...]
Read The Full Article:
Greetings and salutations, minxes and mondains. Melissa McEwan, aka The Pink Petulance, coming to you from Superblogger Headquarters, where SuperKos is delegating responsibilities before taking off for Planet Newsweekia. It’s busy busy busy at Superblogger HQ, and I’ve just been told that Captain Atrios needs to discuss staff rotation at Battlestation Alpha with me, so [...]
Read The Full Article: