Interesting comment. I find it discouraging that a DC Beltway reporter has decided he thinks he is a less than stellar reporter because he has written numerous stories about Gov. Palin. And it somehow makes him less intelligent and by his reasoning us less intelligent because we want to read about her and read her comments.
Further in Milbank's article he writes "Palin clearly isn't going away: "I am not going to sit down. I'm not going to shut up," she on Monday. But if we treat her a little less like a major political figure and a little more like Ann Coulter -- a calculating individual who says shocking things to attract media attention -- it won't matter."
I am shocked and offended at this section of his column. He compares a columnist (one who writes to provoke) to a former elected official with a vast following and one who appears to have little regard or use for established news outlets. Just consider this, the columnist’s primary audience is found on college campus. The former governor has a tremendous following that cuts across almost all demographics. Gov. Palin ran in a primary against an incumbent and beat him. She ran for Alaska governor against a formidable former two term governor and won. She convinced a majority of the voters twice she was a superior candidate. I would not be fair if I did point out two similarities. Both are accomplished females and both are bestselling authors. Frankly, I found this comment by Mr. Milbank shallow and beneath his other stories.
In all honesty, this whole episode reminds me of why I stopped reading and watching most "established" news outlets. Yes, a long time ago I let my subscription to Time lapse, quit buying Newsweek and stopped going to the Washington Post and New York Times websites. Mr. Milbank symbolizes what is wrong with the established media. He thinks he knows what is best for us and we should trust his instincts and what he considers his obvious superior intellect. You see, we need him to help us figure out what we need to know. And we need him to tell us what to ignore.
My take is different. The establishment media is witnessing a steep decline in viewership and readership. Perhaps most importantly, I think a vast plurality (perhaps majority) do not entirely trust established media. The public benefits greatly from other sources, many free and on the internet. It was only 30 years ago we had three major networks and one cable news channel to choose from. You either put up with the bias or did not get your message out. It is far different today. We have numerous media outlets to choose from and several publications that we can tap to be better informed.
I think it really upsets Mr. Milbank and his establishment media friends that Gov. Palin has millions of followers and admirers, regardless how he tries to undermine the former governor. It must gall him and his establishment friends that we do not need him or his friends to follow Gov. Palin. We can go directly to the source; we can read her and other tweets, look on Facebook, blogs, CSPAN, think tank websites, and other sources. Most importantly, it must really irk him and his friends that Gov. Palin does not need him or his establishment friends to talk to her supporters and followers. Finally, I think it must anger Mr. Milbank and his friends that they need Gov. Palin far more than she needs him and his friends. It must be hard for Mr. Milbank to finally accept that he gets more irrelevant every day. In case you think I am wrong, how much was Newsweek sold for?
Postscript - March 8, 2011
I am somewhat confused. We, the public, experienced Charlie Sheen’s meltdowns, incoherence, rants, and raves again and again and again as the actor appeared on network after network. It is this what Mr. Milbank means by an obsessed establishment media? If so, he may actually have a valid point. Perhaps Mr. Milbank should concentrate his proposed moratorium on stories (or non-stories) like this.
No comments:
Post a Comment