....LMB: "The Encyclopedia Brown Distraction"....

September 10, 2004

Sigh. The Unofficial John Kerry Blogger Support Team has been tricked.

While it's fun to support Kerry by ripping W for going AWOL in the National Guard, it doesn't really get Kerry any closer to the White House. To support Kerry, you really do need to focus on Bush's terrible domestic policy and his failures in Iraq and the war on terrorism. That's what resonates with the voters.

But at present, the bloggers have blown amazingly off-course.

Not only are they not talking about Bush's true weak points, not only are they not talking about Bush's military record directly, not only are they not talking about documents regarding Bush's military record, not only are they not even talking about the authenticity of documents about Bush's military record, they're debating the capabilities of 1970s typewriters!!!

Y'see, CBS uncovered some military documents from the 1970s which make George W. Bush look bad. Right-wing bloggers decide that the documents must be fake, and cobble together "proof" that they are fake. Their "proof" is pretty much "you can make documents that look a lot like this one using Microsoft Word" and "we're not experts on typewriters, but we think that the model of typewriter that we think was allegedly used to type these documents couldn't make that kind of font."

Liberal bloggers are fighting back (not just the fellow I linked to above, lots of em), arguing that yah-huh, those typewriters could too make that font, no tag backs.

So they're about five steps removed from talking about anything that actually helps John Kerry. And even if the liberal bloggers win this debate, all they've managed to do is get one piece of evidence that Bush didn't fully complete his military service accepted into the public record. Which is something that the voting public doesn't seem to care much about, and therefore accomplishes nothing.

Good work, fellas.

Posted by Jake at 12:49 PM | TrackBack (0)

The fact that you said "no tag backs" absolutely slays me, by the way.

Posted by: Tom at September 10, 2004 01:25 PM

Well, I'm ignoring the typewriter crap and wrote a post today about why Catholics need to vote for Kerry. But yeah, the big-audience blogs pay way too much attention to the nattering wingnut blogs, anyway.

Posted by: Amanda at September 10, 2004 01:35 PM

This is true. It annoys me as well, and the bottom line is the White House and DoD released these, not some third party or The Kerry Campaign.

But to more important issues- Iraq is costing us $177M a day, and who's paying for it? The lower classes? Who's profiting? not them. And who's kids are dying... *calms down*

Posted by: Brian/Buddy at September 10, 2004 01:59 PM

Over at Available Light we're worried about the state of Kerry's campaign and urging people not to be boobs for Bush.

Posted by: Available Light at September 10, 2004 09:06 PM

the fact is, is that bush doesn't want us to think about his campaign in iraq, he doesn't want us to think about the economy or vietnam or any hard historical things. He wants us to think about the future, and how he's such as hard drawn leader that will protect us, and how kerry is a pussy, no matter what the evidence shows.

Fact is, the white house has not said those docs were false, and that means the world as far as politcs are concerned. We can say what we want, but to me, that proves that it's not 'libel', or false bullshitting. Instead, they are expecting the 'blog world' to cut it apart for them. Because it's essentially the blog world that is gettin this information in the first place, and they are better equipped to spin the story whichever way they want.

The fucked up thing that I don't understand is that

A. Kerry was there....he volunteered to go back numeroud times.

B. He opted out because he got 3 purple hearts....don't you think you'd quit after yo got three times closer to death?

C. He ralied against the war once he got back. Don't you think in you're right mind, after seein that shit, you'd not want to do it anymore and be against it??

D. The bill may have been to give soldiers armor, but tucked inside was more non-bid contract bullshit and free corporate givaways, and he voted against it. Therefore they say he denied the soldiers of that they needed. Is that flip-flopping?

Posted by: Lindsey at September 11, 2004 12:42 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Lying Media Bastards is both a radio show and website. The show airs Mondays 2-4pm PST on KillRadio.org, and couples excellent music with angry news commentary. And the website, well, you're looking at it.

Both projects focus on our media-marinated world, political lies, corporate tyranny, and the folks fighting the good fight against these monsters.

All brought to you by Jake Sexton, The Most Beloved Man in America ģ.

contact: jake+at+lyingmediabastards.com

Media News

December 01, 2004

Media Mambo

The Great Indecency Hoax- last week, we wrote about how the "massive outcry" to the FCC about a racy Fox TV segment amounted to letters from 20 people. This week, we look at the newest media scandal, the infamous "naked back" commercial. On Monday Night Football, last week, ABC aired an ad for it's popular "Desperate Housewives" TV show, in which one of the actresses from the show attempted to seduce a football player by removing the towel she was wearing to bare her body to him. All the audience saw, however, was her back. No tits, no ass, no crotch, just her back.

No one complained.

The next Wednesday, Rush Limbaugh told his shocked viewers how the woman had appeard in the commercial "buck naked".

Then, the FCC received 50,000 complaints. How many of them actually saw this commercial is anyone's guess.

The article also shows the amazing statistics that although the Right is pretending that the "22% of Americans voted based on 'moral values'" statistic shows the return of the Moral Majority, this is actually a huge drop from the 35% who said that in the 2000 election or the 40% who said that in 1996 (when alleged pervert Bill Clinton was re-elected). This fact is so important I'm going to mention it over in the main news section too.

Brian Williams may surprise America- Tom Brokaw's replacement anchor, Brian Williams, dismissed the impact of blogs by saying that bloggers are "on an equal footing with someone in a bathroom with a modem." Which is really funny, coming out of the mouth of a dude who's idea of journalism is to read words out loud off a teleprompter. Seriously, if parrots were literate, Brian Williams would be reporting live from the line outside the soup kitchen.

In related news, Tom Brokaw has quit NBC Nightly News, and it appears that unlike his predecessor, the new guy can speak without slurring words like a drunk.

PR Meets Psy-Ops in War on Terror- in February of 2002, Donald Rumsfeld announced the creation of the Office of Strategic Influence, a new department that would fight the war on terror through misinformation, especially by lying to journalists. Journalists were so up in arms about this that the Pentagon agreed to scrap the program.

Don't you think that an agency designed to lie to the public might lie about being shut down, too?

This article gives some examples about the US military lying to the press for propaganda and disinformation purposes.

Tavis Smiley leaving NPR in December- African-American talk show host Tavis Smiley is opting to not renew his daily talk show on National Public Radio. He criticized his former employers for failing to: "meaningfully reach out to a broad spectrum of Americans who would benefit from public radio but simply donít know it exists or what it offers ... In the most multicultural, multi-ethnic and multiracial America ever, I believe that NPR can and must do better in the future." He's 100% correct. NPR is white. Polar bear eating a marshmallow at the mayonaise factory white. And the reason it's so white is that it is trying to maintain an affluent listener base (premoniantly older white folks) who will donate money to their stations. This is a great paradox of American public broadcasting, that they have a mandate to express neglected viewpoints and serve marginalized communities, but those folks can't donate money in the amounts that the stations would like to see.

U.S. Muslim Cable TV Channel Aims to Build Bridges- it sounds more positive than it is "Bridges TV" seems to simultaneously be a cable channel pursuing an affluent American Muslim demographic, and a way of building understanding and tolerance among American non-Muslims who might happen to watch the channel's programming. I was hoping it would be aimed more at Muslim's worldwide, but it ain't. Still, I'd be interested in seeing how their news programs cover the issues.

Every Damned Weblog Post Ever- it's funny cuz it's true.

Wikipedia Creators Move Into News- Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia, created collectively by thousands of contributors. It's one of those non-profit, decentralized, collective, public projects that show how good the internet can be. Now, the Wikipedia founders are working on a similar project to create a collaborative news portal, with original content. Honestly, it's quite similar to IndyMedia sites (which reminds me, happy 5th birthday, IndyMedia!). I'll admit, I'm a bit skeptical about the Wikinews project, though. IndyMedia sites work because they're local, focused on certain lefty issues, and they're run by activists invested in their beliefs. I'm not sure what would drive Wikinews or how it would hang together.

CBS, NBC ban church ad inviting gays- the United Church of Christ created a TV ad which touts the church's inclusion, even implying that they accept homosexuals into their congregation. Both CBS and NBC are refusing to air the ad. This is not too surprising, as many Americans are uncomfortable about homosexuality, and because TV networks are utter cowards. But CBS' explanation for the ban was odd:

"Because this commercial touches on the exclusion of gay couples...and the fact that the executive branch has recently proposed a Constitutional amendment to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, this spot is unacceptable for broadcast."

Whoa, what? First of all, the ad does not mention marriage at all. Second, since when do positions opposite of the Executive Branch constitute "unacceptable"? This doesn't sound like "we're not airing this because it's controversial", this sounds like "we're afraid of what the President might say."

Posted by Jake at 10:09 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
More Media News

Jake Jake Jake


Fake "Ha-Ha" News




"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of what he was never reasoned into."

-Jonathan Swift

More Quotes

Media News


Obligatory Blog Links



Damn. That joke would have been much funnier if I'd said "apprentice" instead of "intern".

More Snapshots

Columnists Of Note



Sonic Resistance


Dead Trees


Heavy Rotation



Squiggles of Insight



Design and Layout by Mark McLaughlin and Quang Tang
LMB Logo by Quang Tang

Alt "One Hell of a Leader" logo largely stolen from Obey Giant.
All other material by Jake Sexton (unless otherwise cited)

hosted by nice dream