Hey, everybody's got a right to their opinion and all the candidates takes their hits in the press. But with Fournier, his hits this year have never targeted McCain. The latest AP column is more proof of why McCain aides wanted to hire Fournier to spin for them.
From 236.com. Enjoy.
Longtime Springsteen fans may have caught onto our new blogs's name; it's copped from the relatively obscure, Nebraska-era song of his. (Here's a nice analysis of the tune; here are the lyrics.) After running out of "media"-based name possibilities for the blog (we're pretty sure they've all been taken by now), we just liked the idea the song conveyed of a meeting place for folks to gather.
In her rather unflattering review of Thomas Frank's The Wrecking Crew, a charged attack on the Republican's control of Washington, D.C., Times reviewer Michiko Kakutani not only decried the tone of the book (Frank was just too darn angry) but she complained that Frank sometimes didn't back up the factual claims found in his passages.
But as Jonathan Schwarz at A Tiny Revolution points out, Frank often used something called footnotes to back up the factual claims in his passages. Footnotes that Kakutani didn't always read.
Via FishbowlDC, FNC's Chad Pergam details what went wrong while covering the Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones story.
Todd Gitlin at TPM Cafe notes the ABC anchor suggested Thursday's campaign back-and-forth between Obama and McCain revolved around "which of them is richer."
Not true. It revolved around which one couldn't remember how many houses he owns.
The one that claimed he received virtually no negative coverage from the network nightly news broadcasts during the last month of the primaries. John K. Wilson at Off the Bus notes that, shockingly, MRC's unique brand of analysis doesn't stand up to scrutiny. (Not that Howard Kurtz would ever say so.)
Writes Wilson: "I challenge MRC to release the full details of their study so that outside observers can determine exactly how they determined "bias" in the media and why their results are so far out of touch with reality."
Your move Brent.
OK, we get it. You scooped everyone on the terribly important John Edwards affair story. And in the wake of that we patiently put up with all the media hand-wringing about how reporters should have covered the story.
But Enquirer editor David Perel's new, self-centered victory lap at Huffington Post, where he claims the story represented some sort of "watershed" moment in journalism, just makes us wish he'd go back to chasing cheating husbands.