Public TV Not So "Public" Anymore: PBS Loses It's Way

As reported by "Fairness in Reporting."

From the article:

"public television" features guestlists strongly dominated by white, male and elite sources, who are far more likely to represent corporations and war makers than environmentalists or peace advocates. And both funding and ownership of these shows is increasingly corporate, further eroding the distinction between "public" and corporate television. There is precious little "public" left in "public television."

Add this little revelation to the fact that Gwen Ifill has jumped into the fray, criticizing Sarah Palin for *knowing* that the Boston Tea Party happened in 1773.

I sit here shaking my head. Because I was once a HUGE fan of PBS. In the 80's and 90s I relied heavily on McNeil-Lehrer and McLaughlin, to keep me up to date on what was happening in Washington. My kids literally cut their teeth watching these programs every Friday evening. Then my husband and I would talk to them about the issues. We took them to meet Mort Kondracke "in person" once. (Have his autograph to prove it.) We adored Eleanor Clift. Admired them all. Told the kids public journalism was important. Noble, even. Warned them about the dangers inherent in relying on commercial reporting.

In 2008 I *tried* to go back to PBS. For old times sake, I guess. But, I was gravely disappointed. Ifill was everywhere with her obvious Obama swooning. Eleanor (bless her heart) even became an Obama mouthpiece after the DNC gave Hillary's delegates to him. I was aghast when the McCain camp decided that Ifill could moderate the debate between Palin and Biden. (Gwen did her party bosses proud, too. And that is when I swore off PBS "news.")

What has happened to independent journalism in this country?

Oh, and... why the heck does WAPO have to caution it's "journalists" not to bicker with their readers on Twitter? Shouldn't they know that already? Did they skip college or something?? (Disclaimer: Mr. Greenslade draws the wrong conclusion here, IMO. But this is the only reference I can find to the WAPO warning.)

So The Leftie Rags Are Our Friends Again? (Conservative "Feminist Hawks" Gaining Momentum!)

I find it quite odd how much attention Feminism is being paid in the Leftie Rags all of a sudden. Don't you? I mean, publications that were rife with overt and unapologetic sexism during the 2008 elections are suddenly our friends again. Strange.

WAPO, as I posted a few days ago. And also NYT.

What gives, I wonder?

A little trip over to The Chesler Chronicles may shed some light. Read her essay titled "Feminist Hawks Unite" for a list of clues. Quoting Phyllis now:

>"Among writers concerned with women’s rights are: Frontpage editor Jamie Glazov; Anat Berko; Tammy Bruce (who was once the President of Los Angeles NOW); Nonie Darwish; Brigitte Gabriel; Professor Donna Hughes; Nancy L. Kobrin; Robert Spencer, Wafa Sultan; and countless others. I will be adding more names to this list.

I know, I know: Many of the above writers are conservatives, not liberals. Some are new-comers, others not. But they are all, myself included, “hawkish” on the subject of the war against women and a) will not engage in cultural relativism to avoid being called “racists” or “Islamophobes;” b) will not be held hostage to one of two political parties; c) will not sacrifice Israel, America, the West, Muslim democrats/dissidents–or the truth–in order to remain politically correct and aligned to social, political, and funding networks.

I think Dr. Chesler has hit on something. The Left is awakening from it's Obama kool-ade stupor, and finding a groundswell of "Conservative" Feminism. They realize they've somehow missed the boat... and they are paddling hard to catch up. The Left's cultural relativist ideology is locking horns with pure Feminist Hawk-ology. This is not what the "Third Wave" expected to encounter in the wake of it's great SuperFemiMan "victory."

Not at all.

SYD

WAPO Pulls Sexist "Mouthpiece" Due to Outrage (Good Job, Ladies!)

TGW reports on it.

"The outrage included a letter from Women, Action and the Media (WAM) which "demanded an explanation for what it called 'the video's patently sexist -- and otherwise tasteless -- content,' which the writers said displayed 'misogyny' and 'utter contempt for women.'"

I don't have much time for this stuff today, as my own 20 year old daughter is having surgery. I'll just say a big THANKS on her behalf. For all those who were outraged (as I was) and had the time/ energy to take action.

SYD

One by One, Liberal Sources Sell Out In Deference to their Corporate Candidate: MSNBC, WAPO and DU in the "Obama Era."

There is a strange thread running through the undermedia today. It is that the overmedia on the Left continues to lose all credibility with Americans (most particularly PUMAs.) And they are hurting because of it.

Take, for instance, the continuing decline of Keith Olbermann at MSNBC. This is a commentator that many PUMAs once listened to, and admired. After he turned on us, though, we abandoned him. While Keith was once competitive with Bill O'Reilly ... now he is lucky to surpass Nancy Grace in the Neilson's. He's been in freefall, ever since he told the Clinton wing of the Democratic party to take a hike. He'd like to see their favored candidate taken into a room and killed. (Or beaten so senseless that she doesn't come back out.)

A similar epitaph can be written for Keith's colleague Rachel Maddow. Once respected and revered for her feisty and well thought out opinions, Rachel bought into the Obamania and drank the kool-ade. She didn't go as far as Olberjerk did. But, still, she has lost credibility among a huge segment of the Democratic party. Because of this, it is unlikely that she will ever come anywhere near eclipsing O'Reilly or Hannity.

That's a shame, really.

Then there is this very odd story unfolding about WAPO and how it's publisher planned to sell access to it's reporters. The plan was to hold some private "Salons," where D.C. lobbyists and Obama administration officials would pay up to $250,000 for a seat at the table. Said table was... get this... in her private residence. Weymouth is backpeddling as hard as she can about the whole ordeal. But if you do some research you will find evidence that she actually sent some of the invitations from her private e-mail account. Needless to say, the WAPO scandal has become a P.R. nightmare.

It is worth noting, as well, that the Democratic Underground (which I refuse to link here) has also gone the way of complete and total pandering. Moderator, Skinner, has apparently added an "unrecommend" feature that allows anything remotely anti-Obama to be immediately removed by the Obot army over there. Another former hang-out of free thinking Democrats has thus fallen under the censorship of pro-Obama operatives. Dissent has gone out the window. (I only know this second hand, as I refuse to EVER visit the D.U. again. Just as I refuse to ever watch Keith Olberjerk again.)

These are but four examples of formerly reliable, Left leaning, sources that have lost all credibility in the wake of the "Obama Era." And I might add, it's not all so hopeful and joyous as Ms. Solnit thought it would be.

I'm sad about that. Really, I am.

But... at least I am not surprised.

SYD

PS. I would just like to add that, as a Feminist, I take no joy in seeing the Female publisher at WAPO go down in history as one who blatantly and brazenly sold influence. Further, I do not enjoy seeing a Lesbian, Feminist commentator bringing up the rear in cable news ratings night after night. Alas, I believe this is a sad day for anyone who values a free and responsible press. Which we clearly do not have. In the "Age of Obama."

UPDATE: Another Case in Point, from the Conservative side of the aisle: David Brooks has been getting "intimate" with at least one Republican Pol. Eeewwww.