Daily Howler doesn't think much of the Jeff Gannon story...

[springhill]

What do you think about this reasoning?


NOW THEY’VE GOT BOEHLERT! Why won’t news orgs cover Jeff Gannon? Could it be because Gannon ain’t news? // link // print // previous // next //

SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2005

OMIGOD—NOW THEY’VE GOT BOEHLERT: No one admires Salon’s Eric Boehlert more than we do here at THE HOWLER. Well—almost surely, somebody does, but for obvious reasons, we have admired his work for years. And yes, we’ve consulted on some of his biggest stories—stories that almost changed human history! Why, we even did lunch at one point.
Boehlert has long done superlative work. That’s why we’re troubled when he seems to fall for a fad—a fad that is currently spooking the web. And that’s why we answer his question from Friday: “Why has the mainstream media ignored the scandal?”

Of course, we can’t say why news orgs have behaved as they have. But why might the press have ignored this story? Could it be because it’s hopelessly trivial? In our view, the fascination with this story is another sign of the liberal web’s imperfect judgment—its tendency to confuse the wheat with the chaff, its inability to get a read on what sort of stories really matter.

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh022605.shtml

[benburch]

1. They are simply wrong.

Gannon is the thin edge of the wedge we will use to complete the (political) destruction of George W "bonghit" Bush and his whole corrupt, murdering, treasonous crime syndicate.

[Eric J in MN]

2. The POINT is that Jeff Gannon wasn't big, but the White House

let him in, when it wouldn't have let in a liberal blogger with similar qualifications.

It's about the abuse of power of the Bush Admin. in credentialing reporters, like their abuse of power of almost everything they have power over.

[dave123williams]

3. Yep; here's my response to the howler...

Bob,

While I turn to the daily howler regularly for insightful (and
regularly pithy) media analysis, you've completely missed the mark on the Gannon story.

Take a deep breath, and realize that it's a scandal. Prostitutes who are given both access and credence by our Government are a qualifiable
security risk to the nation. Not to be indelicate, but the reason is the potential for blackmail. I think you know that.

His clients, on both sides of the aisle, and in the ranks of the
mainstream media who'd rather not have his little black book exposed are an even bigger story.

Oh; there's also the angle that this is all tied up in the current Federal Criminal Grand Jury inquiry in to the outing of a CIA undercover operative. It's an actual investigation, and that on it's own merits careful scrutiny by reporters.

I suppose you'll find the looming indictments to be handed down from this Grand Jury to be a 'non-story', too?

This isn't just a story; it's a piece of bloody red meat. And
objectively, it's a nice rare chunk of filet mignon.

Were I a journalist, or a mere media analyist, I'd be asking questions
instead of denegrating the topic. That's what partisan hacks do.

Best,

Dave Williams

[Demit]

4. I agree with everything in your response, except...

The Daily Howler is not pithy. I get exasperated plowing through his items sometimes. He goes on and on and on and on and... he is definitely not pithy.

[dave123williams]

5. Well, I guess that's subjective...

He does have the odd nice turn of phrase...

[Cha]

6. Thank you for writing this very

articulate letter to "the howler".

It's amazing how someone other than a "partisan hack" could not find guckert worthy of exposure on all levels.

Wasn't the howler in the middle of a controversy..another time for not thinking something was news?

[Radical Activist]

11. It will never get back to Bush directly in a way that will hurt him

Any scandal that proves true will be blamed on some lower level press staffer or the secret service. That's why it doesn't matter. There are much bigger scandals that have been ignored that involve Bush directly.

[Cocoa]

7. it's consistent with the Howler's philosophy

I would expect the Howler not to think much of this story, and I started out thinking that way too.

I still think it's wrong to think of this as a smoking gun (although I think some digging could lead to one).

The reason I think the story is important is to think of it in terms of what David Brock calls "the republican noise machine." Most members of that machine are people like Gannon that no one ever heard of. But they are crucial parts of the machine, and the people that fund Gannon and Talon News and GOPUSA aren't spending their good money for the fun of it, they mean business and their activities have to be paid attention to.

And what better way to shine a light on that machine than by milking the juicy Gannon story?

[Al-CIAda]

8. Gannon is the posterboy for Bu$hco payola, media corruption and

taxpayer funded deception committed on its own people. The echo chamber, slush funds, and illicit arrangements need to be exposed.

[MrModerate]

9. I think the juice has already been milked . . .

I think the MSM doesn't consider it news because the people don't consider it news.

Keep in mind that the bar has been lowered for Schimpanski. What would be a scandal of hurricane proportions for Clinton is a ho-hum for Bush.

Even many of the people who voted for him don't expect him to tell the truth. He a manly man and that's all that matters.

The people don't really care about shit like this. The people didn't really care about Monica Lewinsky, but the Republican right saw it as a way to bring Clinton down and they worked it tirelessly.

And it didn't bring him down (although it did blight his presidency). And in the end the people (the real people, not the talking heads or the echo chamber or the midgets in congress and the senate) still didn't care.

They won't this time either, and there's no stomach (or majority) among the dems in congress to carry it even as far as Watergate/Monicagate went.

This dog won't hunt.

[Cocoa]

10. you're making a big mistake

you're assuming that to some extent, stories get coverage based on public demand.

In fact, network executives are the ones that decide what we want. They decide that we're want Donald Trump to be fucking everywhere you look on TV, that Laci Petersen was inherently interesting enough to warrant the coverage it got, etc.

Just looking at its own merits (especially how FUNNY the gay prostitute angle -- complete with nude photos and performance reviews -- is) this could easily be THE big story on TV. The #1 political/media story that everyone knows about and follows each daily development.

Has Jay Leno done a single joke about this? If not, there's no good reason for it, Leno should be all over this.

[MrModerate]

12. Sorry to be so clumsy with language . . .

When I said "the people don't care," I meant "the people who package the news are convinced the people don't care." And so, the people WON'T care.

The nude photos angle doesn't really help. I had a look at a few and you can't do anything with them in the MSM -- they're porno.

I don't watch Leno, so I don't know. But I do know that he was all over a number of issues before November's election (mostly, I thought, from a centrist-liberal point of view) and they didn't gain traction.

Remember: this is a story about an unqualified reporter with a seedy past (well, present) getting a press pass. It's not a story about the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES GETTING A BLOWJOB!!!

Here, rover.

[seabeyond]

13. point taken, so inportant stories, plame, no wmbs and bush lies,

out of control iraq, all the deaths, haliburtin and cheney, false studies and report numbers, being bought by bush, ohio election problems, florida election problems, the national election problems, bush support of torture gonzales, liar rice, crook neg whatever.........on and on and on

any of those stories relevent enough to report