Ideal for Journalists: Be Adversarial to Any Administration

[Eric J in MN]

The proper role of journlists was recently discussed in a letter to the New York Times. It was also part of a recent discussion on Fox News.

A recent letter to the New York Times argues that the press should "be adversarial to any sitting administration."

Re "To Tell the Truth," by Paul Krugman (column, May 28):

There has been much debate lately over whether the press has been too easy on President Bush (left wing) or too harsh (right wing).

The press has a responsibility to the public to be adversarial to any sitting administration. It is our only hope of keeping power in check and the government honest.

We are witnessing, with the Iraq war, among other things, what happens when the press stops asking hard questions and demanding explanations.

An adversarial press is doing its job. A timid, compliant press fails all of us.

GINNA GRACEY
Dover, Mass.
(written May 28, 2004, published May 31, 2004)

Ginna Gracey is right.

Of course, I want the press to be more adversarial to the Bush Administration.

But if Kery is elected, I want the press to be adversarial to his administration as well.
---------------------------------
Read More at MoveLeft Media:

http://www.moveleft.com/moveleft_essay_2004_06_03_ideal_for_journalists__be_adversarial.asp

[shraby]

1. Freedom of the press was

put in the constitution for a reason.

[grasswire]

2. every time I write to a reporter...

...I close with this: "Only you stand between the people and tyranny."

It doesn't seem to make much difference.

[Eric J in MN]

3. maybe it's too melodramatic for them (nt)

nt

[maggrwaggr]

4. yeah, most of the lazy fucks would roll their eyes

I try to shame them and make them feel guilty. And if not guilty, at least a little scared that some righteous nutcase like myself might go midevel on their ass.

[Eric J in MN]

5. Have you tried being nice?

Have you tried being nice?

Like saying, "I enjoyed your last article, but please discuss _________ in your next article on this subject."

[maggrwaggr]

9. being nice gets you nowhere

I'm tired of being nice. Dems have been too nice for too long.

We've been getting our asses kicked. The reason this country is in the shape it's in is because Dems have been NICE.

[msmcghee]

6. I disagree . .

The press should be adverse to lies, but should reward honesty by praising it when it occurs.

Simply being adversarial without justification only increases the cynicism of the public - and reduces journalism to entertainment.

Public policy is too important for that. Ginna's position is just a more (possibly) non-partisan way for the media to get rich off of politics. I say possibly because, with the media owned by big corporations expecting big profits for the shareholders, we know whose Gore will get axed.

[Eric J in MN]

8. If they can't find governent corruption, they're not looking

If they can't find government corruption, they're not looking hard enough.

That should be their focus, not praising honesty.

[Walt Starr]

7. I guess the media whores are preparing for a Kerry win

Since they all of a sudden want to get "adversarial".

They haven't been "adversarial" since there was a Democrat in office, and then they were only "adversarial" from January 20, 1992 until January 20, 2001. Prior to that, they did not have an "adversarial role" from January 20, 1981 until January 20, 1992.

[Eric J in MN]

10. to the extent the news coverage has been tougher on Bush

To the extent the news coverage has been tougher on Bush recently, this is my theory:

The press was afraid of being tough on Bush earlier for fear of losing access (not getting interviews, not being told where events would take place).

Now that there is hope that we may get a new President soon, more are willing to run reports unflattering to Bush.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

11. Friggadiggi <sp>

[Eric J in MN]

12. does that mean you agree about the role of the press? (nt)

nt