I do take some exception to Noonan’s describing the refusal of the Whitewash Report to discuss the bias of the CBS crew as “annoying.” She insists that it wasn’t within the purview of their charge. But quite frankly, if a Report can call things what they are, then they are only of questionable value. Furthermore, some of the CBS folks have—as bloggers have noted—taken the Report’s refusal to proclaim their bias and the fraudulence of the memos as something of a mild vindication.
In any event, Noonan concludes by giving something of a picture of the future of media:
…A world where National Review is defined as conservative and Newsweek defined as liberal would be a better world, for it would be a more truthful one. Everyone gets labeled, tagged and defined, no one hides an agenda, the audience gets to listen, consider, weigh and allow for biases. A journalistic world where people declare where they stand is a better one.
Amen to that, Peggy Noonan. A great source of frustration with many Americans is the fact that many folks in Old Media/Legacy Media routinely engage in agenda-driven journalism, but try to masquerade as fair, neutral and even-handed. An admittedly biased journalist will get more credibility with folks than one who falsely maintains that he or she is impartial.
Noonan then offers a vision for the future role of the Networks:
…The days when they could sell a one-party point of view is over…But everyone will buy the networks when they sell what they're really good at, which is covering real news as it happens. Tsunamis, speeches, trials--events. Real and actual news. They are really good at that. And there is a market for it…
Plus, Hugh Hewitt offers a provocative article at Weekly Standard today entitled “A Cover-up is a Cover-up,” comparing the Rathergate cover-up with other cover-up operations, including the Catholic priest sex abuse scandal.
(Twilight Zone, USA)