"The List" of Journolist Participants is Fake

There is now a list going around in conservative websites purporting to be "The List" of media participants in Journolist. It's fake. How do I know? I'm on The List. And I was never on Journolist.

Don't get me wrong, I would have loved to have been on Journolist. It sounds fun. I'd like being on The List even more. That sounds bad ass. Someone I know was on Nixon's Enemies List - I've always thought that was the single coolest distinction anyone could have. This is as close as I got. As much as I would have loved it, I shouldn't be on The List.

Why do I make this painful admission? Is it because I don't want to be associated with those no good libs secretly controlling the media? Hell no. Would have loved that, too. It's because you should know that people that are on that so-called "confirmed" list were not necessarily on Journolist. As usual, the conservative media seems to have completely made this up. Seen this movie before?

I guess I should consider it a compliment that I was on the made up list. In other words, someone thought if there is going to be a liberal media conspiracy I was probably involved. That's pretty cool. But I have a more important question about this purported scandal.

The conservative critics claim this proves the media is all a liberal conspiracy. And as part of the proof, they show e-mails from Journolist trying to sway the media to cover things with a liberal slant. But if the media is already liberal why do the liberals have to convince them?

Some of the e-mails seem to show people strategizing over how to swing the narrative in the press. Well, if it's a conspiracy, why don't they just call up the New York Times, Washington Post, ABC News, etc. and just get them to run their liberal buddies' ideas as facts? Why do they have to try so hard to figure out a way to influence them through their own articles?

Wouldn't this prove the opposite - that the mainstream media is not liberal? They hardly ever listen to these self-avowed liberal journalists. The people on this mailer seem to be on the outside looking in, trying to figure out how the influence the conversation (presumably the same exact thing conservative journalists and advocates are doing).

In fact, in one of the first stories that The Daily Caller ran, they share e-mails from the list about anger toward George Stephanopoulos for asking about Rev. Wright during the 2008 debates. Well, if they run the media, why didn't the liberals just get George not to ask that question? Why did the so-called liberal media ask such a conservative question in the first place? If it's a conspiracy why won't Stephanopoulos listen to them?

In other words, why won't the liberal media listen to the liberal media?

Now, for the extra irony - one of the other questions Stephanopoulos asked in that same debate was planted by ... Sean Hannity. Stephanopoulos was on Hannity's show when pressed about Obama's connection to Bill Ayers and decided that he would ask it in the debate. So, is there then a conservative media conspiracy?

Of course, the reality is that the media has many forms. There are straight news reporters and there are advocate journalists, like some people on Journolist and almost everyone at Fox News (I had to say "almost" because of Shep Smith, damn him for making things complicated).

Of course, many of the people on Journolist freely admit that they write for liberal publications like The Nation, whereas Fox News claims to do fair and balanced reporting. So, they're both advocates, just one side is lying about it (I'm always amused by this lie; how can anyone say with a straight face that Fox News doesn't have a conservative perspective?).

Finally, let me ask you one more question. If the liberal media is so strong how come all of the liberals in the country don't have as much influence as just Glenn Beck? That's really painful to write, but clearly true.

Here's my proof. Every progressive organization, leader, advocate, journalist, congressmen, etc. have said that Elizabeth Warren should be nominated as the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Yet, they still can't get the job done. It is at best a 50-50 proposition right now. Yet, just the thought that Shirley Sherrod might be on Glenn Beck's show on one night is enough to get her fired.

The mere threat of Beck swings the Obama administration immediately. That's power. That's influence. All of the progressives and liberals in the country put together can barely move the president on Warren. And this is supposed to be a liberal president with a liberal media? What an unbelievable joke.

Watch The Young Turks Here

Follow Cenk Uygur on Twitter:www.twitter.com/TheYoungTurks 
Become a Fan of The Young Turks on Facebook: www.facebook.com/tytnation



Tags: Advocate Journalism, Elizabeth Warren, Fox News, Glenn Beck, Journolist, Liberal Media Bias, The List, Media News, conservative blogosphere, conservative media, journalism, liberal media (all tags)




Tucker Carlson has proven himself the pettiest and most pathetic individual time and again.

Why is it that conservatives engaged so willingly in self-deception? Tucker Carlson is willfully misleading his readers and he's unabashedly unremorseful of that fact.

I think Ezra Klein hit the nail on the head when he wrote that this was about increasing his hits (they are up 30% to 200,000 per day) but I'll add that it is also about Tucker increasing his credibility with the rabid deranged wing of the American right wing that sees liberal conspiracies afoot everywhere. Tucker doesn't really belong to the Palin-Bachmann-Tancredo pantheon of insanity but that's where the action is and this is his chance to get a slice of that putrid pie.

by Charles Lemos 2010-07-26 06:38AM | 0 recs
RE: JList

Yeah, he strikes as more of a Gingrich type - intelligent enough and with ocassional flashes of pragmatism, but mostly just slimy and willing to do whatever it takes to slither ahead. His brand first, party second, truth only if there's time left over.

by Nathan Empsall 2010-07-26 03:37PM | 0 recs
RE: "The List" of Journolist Participants is Fake

Interesting to see that the list isn't even real, and the rest was along the lines of what I'd though upon seeing the list anyway - how the heck is a list of known liberals from liberal publications proof that the media is liberal? Aside from a few Politico (hardly a left-wing site) and Newsweek names, where were the Courics and Blitzers, the Tappers and Todds?

by Nathan Empsall 2010-07-26 03:39PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads