Hugh Hewitt -
"There is no doubt that the tectonic plates of journalism are moving. There is awesome potential in the internet as a gatherer, distributor and checker of news - not least through instant delivery channels such as mobile phones. This does not mean old media will die. But it will have to adapt quickly to what has so far been an asymmetrical relationship."
--Guardian columnist Victor Keegan
The lead editorial in the Wall Street Journal, available at Opinionjournal.com, lays out the favor John Kerry did for all of us in declaring himself anti-war on Monday. Even though Kerry flipped back into obscure ambiguities at yesterday's press conference, Monday's "major address" at NYU was a full throated cry to get out and get out now. Old Kerry channeled young Kerry, and for a moment the fog lifted and we glimpsed what John Kerry would do if elected.
It is as though Neville Chamberlain hadn't died in November of 1940, but had instead lived and remained in the government, only to launch a challenge to Churchill's leadership in February of 1942, citing the fall of Singapore as the reason he needed to replace Churchill. Churchill's war leadership was far from perfect --read this review of Field Marshall Lord Alanbooke's war diaries for a glimpse of the imperfections of all involved in the epic struggle to save Great Britain and then defeat the Axis-- but it was far superior to anything else. Kerry's final assault on war policy has brought the campaign exactly where it needs to be, to a focus on the war, and a clear choice between resolve and retreat, and his offer is an offer of appeasement as the centerpiece of American foreign policy.
From the New York Times, a declaration that the president has the campaign exactly where he wants it:
"Mr. Bush and his aides are determined to focus the campaign debate on the decision to liberate Iraq from Saddam Hussein's brutal rule and make the argument that if Mr. Kerry had been in office for the past four years, the dictator would still be in his palace."
From the Washington Post an assessment of Bush's understanding of priorities that would make most Americans happy to hear:
"At its heart, Bush's vision is lofty and idealistic but may appear incomplete to others. Unlike Kerry -- who is more of a "realist" in the mode of Henry Kissinger -- Bush has been willing to upset the established order to achieve his aims. Yet he describes almost all issues through the prism of terrorism, giving short shrift to concerns such as world poverty, globalization and a growing divide between rich and poor that were often the focus of other leaders and that some argue are the root causes of terrorism."
It is not a time for "root causes" blather. Can you imagine someone talking about the root causes of Nazism in 1940?
Now we are poised for a confrontation with Iran, one that cannot be avoided and which ought not to be laid off on Israel. Kerry's plan --put forward by John Edwards-- is simple appeasement. Like Monday's speech by Kerry's, Edwards' late August announcement of "sell them the fuel for paper promises" was a glimpse of the real foreign policy instincts of the Democratic Party in 2004. And it isn't just Kerry and Edwards. It is a widespread and deeply cherished belief in withdrawal and isolationism and buy-offs. It wouldn't work, of course, and the cost in American lives could be huge, but it is a choice --as clear as it gets.
The Los Angeles Times has a long piece on the collapse of CBS credibility, including, finally, a comment from Les Moonves:
"In an indication of how deep concern about the issue has become at the network, Chairman Leslie Moonves commented for the first time Tuesday. He said that while CBS News 'has a long tradition of responsible journalism … it's clear that something went seriously wrong with the process' in the production of the National Guard story.
Moonves, who attended the New York premiere for "CSI:NY" on Tuesday night, declined further comment."
Something went wrong with "the process?" It wasn't the process, it was the producer and the reporter and the president of the news division, who teamed up with the Kerry campaign to launch a smear on the president they hate. How clueless can you be, pointing to "the process?" Mr. Moonves and Viacom's board should process this: Your brand has burned to the waterline while you sat around playing gin rummy and attending premiers. You won't do well in the HBS case study.
Chris Matthews, on bloggers, last night: "Even a broken clock is right twice a day." I suggested on air that he invite Powerline's John Hinderaker for an on-air chat. Beldar or Glenn or a few others would be reps as well. Zell showed America that Chris is a lightweight, and that the best way to deal with him is to refuse to be bullied. I won't be holding my breath for a Hardball that really deals with blogging.
I made a suggestion over a year ago: A weekend show hosted by a blogger --well, yes, I do have ten years of television experience, but there are others-- featuring a revolving panel of bloggers reviewing the news of the week. Would you rather watch Washington Week in Review warm up the already frozen and thawed a couple of times conventional wisdom, or LGF's Charles, Virginia, Matt Yglesias, and especially a newcomer or two like Rick mix it up? Consider the buzz such a show would generate each week. But most television execs don't read the blogosphere so they don't know about that buzz, so they bring us Tina Brown. |
