e-Claire

MSM out of the Closet!

Halperin Memo Dated Friday October 8, 2004 It goes without saying that the stakes are getting very high for the country and the campaigns - and our responsibilities become quite grave[.] I do not want to set off (sp?) and [an] endless colloquy that none of us have time for today - nor do I want to stifle one. Please respond if you feel you can advance the discussion. ...Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win. We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that. I'm sure many of you have this week felt the stepped up Bush efforts to complain about our coverage. This is all part of their efforts to get away with as much as possible with the stepped up, renewed efforts to win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions. It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course. But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest. [sentence fragment] Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right. [no referent for "that" -- do what right? /school marm]

Ok, so this little feller is a VP of a major news... well, "news" outlet and presumably has a degree in Journalism. Presumably he has taken English 101. Obviously he failed it. That screaming irony aside... I am particularly struck by his use of the term "artificially hold both sides 'equally' accountable." And why is equally in quotes? Are they bunny quotes or sneer quotes? What would be "artificial" about holding both sides equally [no quotes] accountable? I am wondering what particular facts, which he apparently assumes his readers already know, could possibly justify *not* holding both sides equally accountable? In his fragment sentence, he indicates that he believes his outfit to be smarter than "voters" who, he believes, need his great "strength and skill" to ever possibly, remotely be able to comprehend what the candidates are saying. Hmmm. Interesting. And to you, Halperin, you whlep, might I say, "thank you kindly for your offer of sneer quotes "help"/sneer quotes but, judging from your unprofessional ignorance of the most basic principles of journalistic integrity, your utter lack of competence which allowed this memo to become public, and your 6^th grade writing skills demonstrating your utter inability to recognize a fact were it to bite you on the hienie, I believe I will decline." The truly odd thing in this, the age of the Pajama People, is that Drudge's pdf of the original memo is completely illegible. Odd, that.