« WaTimes reminds WaPo to chase the smoking gun found by Dobbs | Main | SwiftVets need computer animations to help sell their case »

Monday, September 06, 2004

The profession formerly known as journalism

WaPo's Howard Kurtz pulled no punches today (boldface mine):

USA Today figured it would be no problem for Bush-bashing filmmaker Michael Moore to "unobtrusively observe the convention," as its deputy managing editor put it.

Right. Why would it be a problem to hire a man reviled by the Republican Party as a guest columnist, send him into the lion's den of Madison Square Garden, where he would be trailed by packs of reporters and attacked from the podium by John McCain? Nobody would think that was a cheap stunt — would they? ...

[USA Today] merely succumbed to a trend in which political operatives, moonlighting hacks, unemployed pols and pseudo-celebrities have become interchangeable in the profession formerly known as journalism.

Who can read this without thinking of Groucho Marx' famous letter to the Hollywood Friar's Club:

Please accept my resignation. I don’t care to belong to any club that will have me as a member.

If Michael Moore is a "journalist," then I'm glad I'm just a blogger.

Posted by Beldar at 06:13 AM in Mainstream Media, Politics (2006 & earlier) | Permalink


Other weblog posts, if any, whose authors have linked to The profession formerly known as journalism and sent a trackback ping are listed here:


(1) Dan made the following comment | Sep 6, 2004 8:30:50 AM | Permalink

Well,, like I always say, the first word in journalist is JO

Question, if youdon't mind - Any idea why the "remember personal info" button doesn't work on your comments page? Thanks.

(2) Birkel made the following comment | Sep 6, 2004 8:37:28 AM | Permalink

I'm glad you're a blogger and not a journalist as well. That's why I cite your blog often on my own.

Great writing, great resource.
And the volume...


(3) Jim B made the following comment | Sep 6, 2004 9:25:06 AM | Permalink

I agree with Kurtz on his comments about Michael Moore, but...

Read the list again: "moonlighting hacks"...

He's not referring to Michael Moore there. He covers Moore under the "pseudo-celebrity" category. Guess who he's talking about? Bloggers...

(insert rant here)

(4) Al Bee made the following comment | Sep 6, 2004 8:41:47 PM | Permalink

I see no difference in what Kurtz describes today and journalism 30 years ago.

>>political operatives, moonlighting hacks, unemployed pols and pseudo-celebrities have become interchangeable<< In reality, Kurtz is merely describing his fellow jounalists on the Washington Post.

Reading the Washington Post for over 30 years, what amazes me are the number of journalism majors who write "so called" analyses covering military issues, economic analysis and diplomatic issues based on a 4 year journalism education. The analyses are simply opinions presented as facts. In my estimation 70 per cent of the written matter in the Post is self deduced opinion presented as fact. The obits contain the remaining 30 per cent

I spent 20+ years in the army and I would not call myself a military expert. Knowledgeable yea, expert no.

The comments to this entry are closed.