This story on the front page of AOL (don't ask) kind of bothered me just now. I think it requires an AOL membership to view, so I'll just paraphrase.
The headline was "Cheney Rejects Shake-Up Talk", and it showed a picture of a forcefully-speaking Dick Cheney. The article, at a glance, gave the distinct impression that Cheney was refusing to step down as vice president, despite pressure to do so.
But when I actually read the thing, it became clear that all of the pressure was coming from the reporter writing the article. The reporter cited polls, suggestions from Republicans that the administration needed "some kind of shakeup" or "new blood" to revitalize its effecitveness, and there was one interview where Cheney was asked about the idea of a shakeup, and he responded that there wasn't any shakeup planned, and that the president wasn't concerned about his poll numbers.
But all that stuff came together into an article that looked like it was saying, "Cheney needs to step down, but he refuses! Look how mad he is in this picture!"
The headline might as well have been, "Bored reporter, starved for controversy, invents a story out of whole cloth."
Grr. I want some real journalism, dang it.
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
*peers* Do you mean the Face the Nation reporter, or the writer of the article? Sounds to me like the whole spiel about the low approval ratings, etc, was the writer trying to give some background re: the interviewers' questions. The title of the article (White House Shake-Up Isn't Needed, Says Cheney) made it appear to me as if the story was supposed to be about a possible shake up of the White House staff, that somehow morphed into a "will Cheney resign?" story-- with a poll, even.
--j_k
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
I read the headline "Cheney says he won't resign, will serve out term" and decided that it was yet another example of "leak"ing Administration/Republican insiders with a grudge trying to get the press to do their dirty work. Not much sense in reading further because the backstabbers are never identified.
What's disgusting is that members of the press are actually stupid enough to allow themselves to be manipulated that way. Especially the editors who decide to publish/broadcast the resulting "story"s.
[ March 20, 2006, 12:25 AM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
Posted by Nato (Member # 1448) on :
quote:What's disgusting is that members of the press are actually stupid enough to allow themselves to be manipulated that way. Especially the editors who decide to publish/broadcast the resulting "story"s.
Or smart enough...
It makes me mad too, but I can't blame the media TOO much for printing what sells.
Posted by Nato (Member # 1448) on :
Also, Republican senator Norm Coleman also is calling for a shakeup among Bush senior staff: 'I have some concerns about the team that's around the President...We're not operating at the highest level of political sensitivity.'
Senator Chuck Hagel recognizes the failed policy in Iraq: 'We're in a lot of trouble in Iraq. The American people know it and we need to face up to it and talk about how we get out of it,'
Zalmay Khalizad, General Pace, and General Abizaid also contradict the president on Iraq. (Pace specifically refuted the President's claim that we have evidence indicating that Iran is the source for parts for some IEDs.)
The story you're talking about reports on statements made on the program Face the Nation, not exactly material the reporter made up, even if he didn't quote the source exactly.