Thursday, May 15, 2003

WHY I'M NOT WRITING
ABOUT THE NEW YORK TIMES
JAYSON BLAIR AFFAIR


Ho hum.

Here are the details of the New York Times Jayson Blair affair. That is, if you really feel like wading through all ten pages of it. I only read the first page before I decided that the story just isn't worth my time.

Explaining why it's not worth my time, however, is worth my time.

Every now and then I have a moment of realization. One of those moments was when I was watching the movie Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media. The movie is both a sort of biography of Noam Chomsky and a good explanation of his and Edward Hermann's propaganda model of the US news media. In order to visually represent the New York Times' imbalance of coverage between genocide in Cambodia by the Khmer Rouge (official US enemies) versus genocide in East Timor by Indonesia (official US allies), two rolls of toilet paper, each symbolizing inches of newspaper column space devoted to each story are unrolled side by side: the Indonesia toilet paper runs out after a couple of feet; the Khmer Rouge toilet paper seemingly unrolls into infinity. That's when I realized that the New York Times is full of shit.

The Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting site, in fact, has an entire page full of links to reports of inaccuracy, bias, and outright lies and propaganda found in the Times. Story titles are "New York Times on Iraq Sanctions: A case of journalistic malpractice," "Only 'Elegant' Victims Need Apply," "Doublethink on the Editorial Page: Editorials Preach Compassion, Push Austerity," "Sweatshops are the Workers' Friend: And Labor Activists Their Enemies--According to the New York Times," "Holes in Ozone Coverage," and the like. The New York Times blows it seemingly every day.

That's why their editorial board's hemorrhaging about the multiple misdeeds of a lowly cub reporter is about as absurd as President Bush calling Ariel Sharon a "man of peace." I am reminded of the one-bad-apple understanding of the wave of corporate accounting scandals last year that criticized the corporate felons who were caught, but not the system that allowed them to get away with it. The Times' reaction to the misdeeds of Jayson Blair is truly Orwellian, truly weird "doublethink." Certainly, Blair has no business practicing journalism, but then neither do his bosses, and their crimes are far, far worse.

Firing Blair is a big show, designed to make the New York Times look like it actually has integrity. Blair is not the real story; he's simply a diversion. The consistency of the lies, distortions, and pro-government, pro-corporate propaganda vomited out by the Times on a daily basis is the real story.

I'm not expecting to see that headline anytime soon.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$