Comments on: The media: a cautionary tale http://www.callingallwingnuts.com/2006/08/28/the-media-a-cautionary-tale/ Kickin' ass on the lyin' side: A never-ending battle against stupid, ugly, deceitful and corrupt right-wing water carriers... Thu, 4 Dec 2008 20:39:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1 By: On The Turning Away » Stark Calling All Wingnuts http://www.callingallwingnuts.com/2006/08/28/the-media-a-cautionary-tale/#comment-14448 On The Turning Away » Stark Calling All Wingnuts Wed, 01 Nov 2006 16:02:20 +0000 http://www.callingallwingnuts.com/2006/08/28/the-media-a-cautionary-tale/#comment-14448 [...] It turns out Mike Stark has a blog, Calling All Wingnuts. Interestingly, he detailed a simiar encounter with Sen. Allen and his staff back in August. Apparently not satisfied with the exchanges with a journalist who covered the incident, he critiqued - [T]he greatest offense is the hubris of the journalists’ profession. These folks really do, time after time, carry about them an air of royalty… A sense of being the arbiters of truth whose words shall not be questioned. They are sucked up to by many of the powerful people they write about, and they need access to the same people in order to remain relevant. The product of this witch’s brew is a journalist class that treats its readers and the disaffected with a certain contempt… And that’s really too bad… because the whiskey swilling, cheap cigar chomping, arm-pit stained, unkempt muck-raker that is so integral to keeping a functional democracy from becoming gassy and bloated and, well, dysfunctional… well… where are they? I want them back. « al-Jazeera International Coming to a TV near You   [...] […] It turns out Mike Stark has a blog, Calling All Wingnuts. Interestingly, he detailed a simiar encounter with Sen. Allen and his staff back in August. Apparently not satisfied with the exchanges with a journalist who covered the incident, he critiqued - [T]he greatest offense is the hubris of the journalists’ profession. These folks really do, time after time, carry about them an air of royalty… A sense of being the arbiters of truth whose words shall not be questioned. They are sucked up to by many of the powerful people they write about, and they need access to the same people in order to remain relevant. The product of this witch’s brew is a journalist class that treats its readers and the disaffected with a certain contempt… And that’s really too bad… because the whiskey swilling, cheap cigar chomping, arm-pit stained, unkempt muck-raker that is so integral to keeping a functional democracy from becoming gassy and bloated and, well, dysfunctional… well… where are they? I want them back. « al-Jazeera International Coming to a TV near You   […]

]]> By: tim http://www.callingallwingnuts.com/2006/08/28/the-media-a-cautionary-tale/#comment-14365 tim Wed, 01 Nov 2006 08:40:24 +0000 http://www.callingallwingnuts.com/2006/08/28/the-media-a-cautionary-tale/#comment-14365 Mike, Thanks for doing this. I enjoyed listening to Allen asking if you were a journalist. Both your questions were 100 perecent valid, and questions which deserve an answer, for the sake of the voters. Whether you choose to play by the rules of the chattering class is up to you, but in a sense it's sort of pointless. They are quite threatented by bloggers or any independent voice that has not been credentialed by j-school, and developed the condescending tone of the true insider. You are dead on when you discuss this fact...it's the reason that so much of what passes for reporting these days is merely stenography for the powerful. Mike,
Thanks for doing this. I enjoyed listening to Allen asking if you were a journalist. Both your questions were 100 perecent valid, and questions which deserve an answer, for the sake of the voters.

Whether you choose to play by the rules of the chattering class is up to you, but in a sense it’s sort of pointless. They are quite threatented by bloggers or any independent voice that has not been credentialed by j-school, and developed the condescending tone of the true insider. You are dead on when you discuss this fact…it’s the reason that so much of what passes for reporting these days is merely stenography for the powerful.

]]> By: Jake http://www.callingallwingnuts.com/2006/08/28/the-media-a-cautionary-tale/#comment-14191 Jake Tue, 31 Oct 2006 22:26:27 +0000 http://www.callingallwingnuts.com/2006/08/28/the-media-a-cautionary-tale/#comment-14191 Hey man, that's the way it goes. Now, you have to REALLY wonder about EVERYTHING in a newspaper or off any newswire or on TV. NONE of it could be true. It could be close to the truth, but not the truth. Welcome to the 21st century. Hey man, that’s the way it goes. Now, you have to REALLY wonder about EVERYTHING in a newspaper or off any newswire or on TV. NONE of it could be true. It could be close to the truth, but not the truth.

Welcome to the 21st century.

]]> By: Jeff http://www.callingallwingnuts.com/2006/08/28/the-media-a-cautionary-tale/#comment-10903 Jeff Fri, 15 Sep 2006 12:43:43 +0000 http://www.callingallwingnuts.com/2006/08/28/the-media-a-cautionary-tale/#comment-10903 Yakki, your ability to persue legal actions becomes severely curtaled when you put yourself "in the public eye". Defamation cases, as Mike is learning in law school, require you to provide overwhelming evidence of three things: 1) the action was patently false, and could not be construed otherwise 2) the person who claims to have been defamed was done substantial harm by the action, and 3) the person who took the action was aware at the time that it was untrue and acted with intent to cause substantial harm. Courts do not usually side in cases of this nature where the person claiming harm intentionally exists "in the public eye", and I am sure they would rule that Mike fits that delimiter. Yakki, your ability to persue legal actions becomes severely curtaled when you put yourself “in the public eye”. Defamation cases, as Mike is learning in law school, require you to provide overwhelming evidence of three things: 1) the action was patently false, and could not be construed otherwise 2) the person who claims to have been defamed was done substantial harm by the action, and 3) the person who took the action was aware at the time that it was untrue and acted with intent to cause substantial harm.
Courts do not usually side in cases of this nature where the person claiming harm intentionally exists “in the public eye”, and I am sure they would rule that Mike fits that delimiter.

]]> By: Yakki http://www.callingallwingnuts.com/2006/08/28/the-media-a-cautionary-tale/#comment-10892 Yakki Fri, 15 Sep 2006 08:49:27 +0000 http://www.callingallwingnuts.com/2006/08/28/the-media-a-cautionary-tale/#comment-10892 Eh,if the reporter completely misrepresents you,isn't there legal action that can be taken? I mean,if it can be deemed libelous anyway. It would seem to me that could be the case. However,I recognise that by the time it would be mediated and set right,many of the newspaper readers would have formed a damaging "first impression" of Mike. I guess maybe it would depend on the mischaracterisation? Eh,if the reporter completely misrepresents you,isn’t there legal action that can be taken? I mean,if it can be deemed libelous anyway.

It would seem to me that could be the case. However,I recognise that by the time it would be mediated and set right,many of the newspaper readers would have formed a damaging “first impression” of Mike.

I guess maybe it would depend on the mischaracterisation?

]]>