While the CSM’s Patrik Jonsson is trying to pass the JournoList scandal off as a nothing a big deal in this article, this Daily Caller post rips the lid off the JournoList’s willingness to traffic in censorship. It isn’t a stretch to say that JournoList members are downright hateful:

If you were in the presence of a man having a heart attack, how would you respond? As he clutched his chest in desperation and pain, would you call 911? Would you try to save him from dying? Of course you would.

But if that man was Rush Limbaugh, and you were Sarah Spitz, a producer for National Public Radio, that isn’t what you’d do at all.

In a post to the list-serv Journolist, an online meeting place for liberal journalists, Spitz wrote that she would “Laugh loudly like a maniac and watch his eyes bug out” as Limbaugh writhed in torment.

In boasting that she would gleefully watch a man die in front of her eyes, Spitz seemed to shock even herself. “I never knew I had this much hate in me,” she wrote. “But he deserves it.”

Ms. Spitz’s hatefulness is disgusting and disturbing. It’s irrelevant that she works by NPR. This is proof, along with Ezra Klein’s starting the group, that the erstwhile MSM employs hatemongers who viscerally hate people and who don’t think twice about shutting up those that report things differently. They don’t even think it’s a big deal:

The JournoList story is a great scoop for the Daily Caller, but doesn’t necessarily indicate a broader media conspiracy, says Mike Hoyt, editor of the Columbia Journalism Review.

“The Daily Caller has an interesting story that gives us insight into the way some journalists talk to each other, but I also think that reporters have a right to think and talk and be frank with each other,” says Mr. Hoyt. “At the same time, I think if they do it in a forum like this, they have to know some energetic reporter can report it, and that’s exactly what happened.”

In other words, Mr. Jonsson doesn’t think that the story is a big deal, that talking like that is perfectly acceptable in such a setting.

“I am genuinely scared” of Fox, wrote Guardian columnist Daniel Davies, because it “shows you that a genuinely shameless and unethical media organisation *cannot* be controlled by any form of peer pressure or self-regulation, and nor can it be successfully cold-shouldered or ostracised. In order to have even a semblance of control, you need a tough legal framework.” Davies, a Brit, frequently argued the United States needed stricter libel laws.

“I agree,” said Michael Scherer of Time Magazine. Roger “Ailes understands that his job is to build a tribal identity, not a news organization. You can’t hurt Fox by saying it gets it wrong, if Ailes just uses the criticism to deepen the tribal identity.”

Jonathan Zasloff, a law professor at UCLA, suggested that the federal government simply yank Fox off the air. “I hate to open this can of worms,” he wrote, “but is there any reason why the FCC couldn’t simply pull their broadcasting permit once it expires?”

That a UCLA law professor thinks it’s ok to pull FNC’s license is stunning enough. That he doesn’t appear to understand that cable networks don’t have broadcasting permits and that the FCC doesn’t regulate them is breathtaking.

JournoList’s hatefulness and lawlessness is instructive of who today’s media is. It’s time that people started investing in new media. We can’t tolerate the Agenda Media’s corruption because free societies can’t survive without the consistent flow of verifiable, accurate information.

Based on the information in these articles, there’s no reason why we should trust the information published by the Agenda Media.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

2 Responses to “JournoList’s Transgressions”

  • R-Five says:

    Remember that other female reporter years ago who said she’d have at least oral sex with Bill Clinton because he was such a great protector of abortion rights? These types wouldn’t go near Rush to do CPR but they’ll gratefully put their lips on Bill’s …

  • Gary Gross says:

    Great point, Rex…you’re exactly right.

Leave a Reply