Friday, February 11, 2005
Your tax dollars at work
Really?
I guess they're funding it with the part of the budget that comes from CIA drug money.
I really never thought I'd live to see the Pentagon Channel, I really didn't. Fuck.
posted by Scats : 2/11/2005 12:35:00 AM
The U.S. military is to beam its own news coverage to millions of Americans.
Moving on from its phase of embedding journalists, or as some would say, 'a policy of restricting and controlling the flow of information,' the Pentagon will now produce and disseminate the news itself. It will be beamed to the public at no charge. The service will emanate from what is known as the Pentagon Channel, an internal public relations television unit within the Department of Defense. It was set up nine months ago.
I guess they're funding it with the part of the budget that comes from CIA drug money.
I really never thought I'd live to see the Pentagon Channel, I really didn't. Fuck.
posted by Scats : 2/11/2005 12:35:00 AMThursday, February 10, 2005
In Arms Way
Gannon Falls Prey to Whorl of Crazy Ethical Chaos that Is the Blogopshere
Well, luckily we have Howard ("Mistah") Kurtz to distill for us one of the important lessons of the recent "Jeff Gannon" affair:
Is that really what this "highlights"? Is the "atmosphere" of the Web "no-holds-barred" because there are people on the Web who actually do reporting--nay, research so basic that the necessary tool is basically a Google search--rather than whatever forms of ass-lickery and nonsense-peddling pass for journalism among Howie and his ilk? Are "real" journalists somehow "barred" by the lofty, intricate conventions of their profession from doing simple, honest muckraking to expose corruption?
It's this fascist Rethuglican administration that operates according to a "no-holds-barred" ethic--say anything, lie anytime, smear anyone, suppress everything--not the freaking bloggers.
posted by Blicero : 2/10/2005 12:07:18 AM
Gannon's resignation highlights the no-holds-barred atmosphere of the Web...
Is that really what this "highlights"? Is the "atmosphere" of the Web "no-holds-barred" because there are people on the Web who actually do reporting--nay, research so basic that the necessary tool is basically a Google search--rather than whatever forms of ass-lickery and nonsense-peddling pass for journalism among Howie and his ilk? Are "real" journalists somehow "barred" by the lofty, intricate conventions of their profession from doing simple, honest muckraking to expose corruption?
It's this fascist Rethuglican administration that operates according to a "no-holds-barred" ethic--say anything, lie anytime, smear anyone, suppress everything--not the freaking bloggers.
posted by Blicero : 2/10/2005 12:07:18 AMI don't get it
Kos did a post today about Harry Reid's response to the latest plume of shit sprayed at him personally by "president" Bush, even as Reid was sitting a dinner table with Bush, presumably gritting his teeth, his face stoic, shit-spattered. This CNN article is cited:
Kos then declares Reid's response "Nice."
OK fine--"nice" that he was "angered," and said something. But who gives even a tenth of a shit? How far are we into this thing? And still seeing the same old reactions, responses, refutations, and denials from the Dems? Whatever happened to the offensive? Why isn't the article about them "responding" angrily to our smears?
Where are our smears?
posted by Blicero : 2/10/2005 12:02:50 AM
Angered by Republican criticism, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid on Tuesday suggested President Bush's calls for unity are proving "absolutely false."
Kos then declares Reid's response "Nice."
OK fine--"nice" that he was "angered," and said something. But who gives even a tenth of a shit? How far are we into this thing? And still seeing the same old reactions, responses, refutations, and denials from the Dems? Whatever happened to the offensive? Why isn't the article about them "responding" angrily to our smears?
Where are our smears?
posted by Blicero : 2/10/2005 12:02:50 AM
