Comments on: AP: How Things Have Changed

By: slowhandted

slowhandted — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 22:15:55 +0000

The basic point that Fournier appears to be missing is newspapers want news - the analysis they can do for themselves under more forgiving deadlines. . There's also the fundamental falsehood underlying Fournier's assumption that 'analysis' doesn't have a bias. In the very act of moving from neutral-but-hopefully-well-informed observer, the journalist has to come down on one side or the other. Not that it's impossible to do analysis without bias, but it requires particularly adroit journalists working with the luxury of a few days remove. . There's also the suspicion that if you ask your reporters in the field to take a position, they are liable to think what position their bosses would like them to take. No point writing copy that will never run. And it's not exactly a state secret as to where Fournier's allegiances lie. . At the end of it all, the AP ends up doing precisely what they were formed not to do - present news with a slant.

By: lynnanne

lynnanne — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 15:31:35 +0000

Good article, JNS. I don't know if I should be sad for the loss of AP qua AP, but it seems sad somehow.

By: pourmecoffee

pourmecoffee — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 15:30:08 +0000

Bias comes in many thousands of shades other than "Fournier Red." This is why removing the toll gate that is the AP is, in the long run, a good thing for the communication side of journalism. As for the business side of journalism, it is a necessity that the industry get pancake-flat ASAP or risk death.

By: Cliff

Cliff — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 07:35:49 +0000

Also:
Second, the political culture of the Democratic Party has changed over the past decade. There's a fierce new anger among many liberal Democrats, a more militant style and an angry intolerance of dissent and criticism. This is the culture of the left-wing blogosphere and MSNBC's evening line-up -- and soon, it will be the culture of important political institutions in Washington.
.
I find it interesting that Frum (along with every other right-winger I've seen) does not acknowledge the reasons behind our anger. To them, it's just us getting angry for no reason at all.

Good link, sgwhiteinfla, good link.

By: Cliff

Cliff — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 07:27:57 +0000

Hey, fantastic! That didn't get moderated! I'm like 4 for 10 now!

By: Cliff

Cliff — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 07:26:41 +0000

Also:
sgwhiteinfla, the Frum article is pretty great. There's a huge typo, though:
.
I could pile up the poll numbers here, but frankly . . . it's too depressing. You have to go back to the Watergate era to see numbers quite so horrible for the GOP.
.
I think he meant to say, "I could pile up the poll numbers here but they are unbelievable awesome. It's like all of our sins over the past half century are coming back to bite us in our fat, cottage cheesy rear ends!"

By: Cliff

Cliff — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 07:19:49 +0000

Ha! I knew that comment would draw down some moderation!

They'd best get this nonsense fixed, else folks will be moseying on.

By: Cliff

Cliff — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 07:18:47 +0000

Here are some dumb parts to the article (not that I'm slagging you, JNS, on the contrary I am glad you brought these shifts to our attention): . People, he predicted, will get their news online in nuggets that they pick and choose, ignoring the rest. You like Barack Obama? Here's an RSS feed of everything being written about him -- and nothing about John McCain to give it context. Like Picasso? Here's everything we have on him, but you may miss the Renoir exhibit because you failed to sign up for Renoir alerts. For the AP, this future is potentially profitable because, with its new online partnerships, it can deliver tailored news directly to every reader's, viewer's and listener's inbox. . A pure mainline of Obama news doesn't cut it. Any reader of news (hopefully) starts piecing together the fact that so very many things are interrelated. The trick is to separate out the dross (ie anything written by Bill Kristol); I don't need Fornier doing that for me. . But in a world, and a Web, full of analysis, opinion and "accountability journalism," what's missing is a neutral referee. , I would like to agree with that, but given how Scherer and Carney treat the notion of a neutral reference, I am willing to suffer with Greenwald's biased posts for a while yet.

By: FlownOver

FlownOver — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 05:59:05 +0000

Ap coverage of yesterday's appearances included this: "While [Palin] spoke, the crowd at her rally cried out about Obama: 'He's a socialist.'" The New Yorker used to have an occasional feature that, applied to this "quote," would read thus: "Cries We Doubt a Crowd Ever Cried."

By: FlownOver

FlownOver — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 05:25:59 +0000

Good piece, Jay. Someone has to be the Joe Friday of the news world: "Just the facts, ma'am."

I've always regarded AP at the national level as near gospel, but the Fournier performance has left me unable to take anything from AP at face value.