Postwar Stubble

Via Steve M., Brent Bozell gets all outraged at the MSM covering the Michael Jackson death saga and not combat deaths in Afghanistan:

“This is a prime example of why network television news audiences are disappearing before our eyes," Media Research Center President Brent Bozell said. "There is no justification for determining that the death of a celebrity over a week ago merits 20 times more news coverage than the tragic deaths of American soldiers in Afghanistan."

Steve is right about the hypocrisy here, in that it used to be quite fashionable in wingnut circles to call the MSM traitors for reporting about US combat deaths. Another point though is that Bozell's point is ludicrous on its face: the Jackson stuff is enormously popular and TV news audiences are increasing. I haven't watched any of the coverage myself, and yeah, Afghanistan is more important, and the service members killed were very likely worthier souls than Jackson, but it is what it is. People want to see the Jackson stuff and so the media's filling the demand.

This gets to why the conservative "media bias" stuff is so asinine; the actual bias is towards eyeballs, profit, and getting ahead according to the strange rules of elite insider journalism.

Comments

[ahab]

Just as the Peter Kings and the Brent Bozells only talk media bias and Afghanistan because that's what gets them ahead. The whores hustle and the hustlers whore.

[ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®©]

Steve is right about the hypocrisy here, in that it used to be quite fashionable in wingnut circles to call the MSM traitors for reporting about US combat deaths.
==========================
If a certain grade B Palpatine hadn't dropped the ball in Afghanistan to go fulfill his PNAC visions of glory and Halliburton profits in Irackeystan, there might not be any soldiers dying in Afghanistan now.

There was a chance to do the right thing there, perhaps.

But the right wing never does the right thing.
~

[The Kenosha Kid]

but it is what it is.

Didn't O'Reilly JUST TELL YOU to stop using that phrase?

[Bitter Scribe]

Why does anyone, in or out of the MSM, take right-wing complaints about the MSM seriously?

[actor212]

actual bias is towards eyeballs, profit, and getting ahead according to the strange rules of elite insider journalism.

BLAMMO!

The only bias in media is the bias towards profits for the megacorporations who own them.

[SteveB]

The only bias in media is the bias towards profits for the megacorporations who own them.

Actually, media megacorporations are more than happy to forgo a little profit if it's necessary to keep views that they find objectionable off the air (e.g., Phil Donohue's firing by MSNBC, Michael Moore's firing by practically everyone else.)

And if the media megacorp is run as a vanity project by a right-wing billionaire, considerations of profit are purely secondary (e.g. Fox News, The Washington Times.)

[parsec]

"...the Jackson stuff is enormously popular and TV news audiences are increasing."

Back in the 90s Cal Thomas frequently lamented that the morals of the Clinton administration were "lowering the nation's moral water table" as reflected by increasing crime and abortions. Thing was, both crime and abortions decreased throughout the period. For Cal, no matter! As with Jonah, whatever the reality was it just proved his point.

[winfernal]

"...and the service members killed were likely worthier souls than Jackson..." Oh really? That's a rather arrogant and idiotic statement that drips with an ugly unstated bigotry. And why sneer at Bozell and the rest of wingnuttia who are peddling the same bullshit talking point when basically you're in agreement with them?

[R. Stanton Scott]

I've always gotten a kick out of the conservative market worshippers who think capitalism is the answer to everything, yet whine loudly when the corporate media gives them Michael Jackson and a multi-billion dollar pRon industry.

[cowalker]

Hannity was saying the exact same thing on his radio show. The troops deserve the same kind of coverage as Jackson!!!

It's a shame that Hannity has no access to some kind of venue where he could choose to broadcast personalized stories about each of the soldiers who were hurt or killed in Afghanistan that week. You know--some forum where he could communicate with a national audience and highlight the individual lives of the troops who are giving their all in military service. Hannity has his priorities right but he's helpless! The industry will never hand him a microphone and allow . . . . Wait. What?

[J Neo Marvin]

Hannity was saying the exact same thing on his radio show. The troops deserve the same kind of coverage as Jackson!!!

Right up until they disagree with the wingnuts, at which point they become "fake soldiers" and "rear-echelon motherfuckers".

[MikeG]

Wasn't Bozell one of the rightard assholes who threw a fit a few years ago when Ted Koppel dared to read out on Nightline the names of all soldiers killed in Iraq?