Further Proving the Point of Modern Journalism is To Generate Clicks, And Not Necessarily to Be Accurate

I don't like tribal red-blue politics, but I read a couple of blogs both from team elephant and team donkey to at least make sure I am not living in a libertarian echo chamber.  From that I know that bloggers on the Right were complaining for years about Maureen Dowd's dishonest editing of quotations to make Republicans look bad.  Apparently, bloggers on the Left, in this case Kevin Drum, have had it with Dowd's dishonest quote manipulation as well.

Which all means that Dowd likely has a job for life at the New York Times, as journalism today seems more about generating controversy and clicks rather than delivering facts -- and controversies like this that send everyone running in circles on Twitter certainly generate attention.  From the New York Times : We have met TMZ and they are us.


  1. skhpcola:

    "I don't like tribal red-blue politics..."

    You're correct. You prefer the tribal "everybody else's ideology sucks, except mine" politics. Why you believe that this makes you different from and superior to those that you sneer about is an enduring mystery.

  2. JB:

    That really doesn't contribute much.

  3. skhpcola:

    Neither does a facile premise, upon which a mansion of cards is built. People that falsely believe that their (supposedly more reasonable) point-of-view is monumentally more logical and correct than hundreds of millions of other Americans begin with a error in judgment and project that error into laughably obtuse conclusions about their righteousness.

    But I'm referring more to other topics here, not simply this one narcissistic cleight-of-hand. It's a recurring theme here, wherein Warren touts his "Premium Cola Ideology" over the mundane "Coke and Pepsi Ideology" of the filthy masses. If you've been here very long, you'll recognize the shiboleth of superiority that marks a vast number of Libertardians.

  4. bryan fine:

    Kevin Drum fan eh?

  5. skhpcola:

    Yeah, I think that Warren is a fan of Kevin Dumb. He must be, because he gives that brainstem a lot of traffic and apparently sops up the tripe that Dumb hastily dashes off.

  6. bryan fine:

    I love that, when people change around a couple of letters in the name of something they don't like to make it sound like something else. People who wonder about the success of fox news must just not get how entertaining it is.

    My apologies for the mistake though, I just assumed that if libertarianism didn't appeal to you and you weren't swooping in to defend KD, there would be no other reason to be here.

  7. marque2:

    I have been a long time reader here as well - I can see where skhpcola is coming from.

  8. rst1317:

    A variation of this is claiming something in the headline without the article backing it up at all. In this case, the headlines claims millennials are ditching cars but the article offers no measurements to back that claim.


  9. bryan fine:

    I can't. Is he saying that everyone should proudly join team red or team blue because obviously all those people can't be wrong... despite the fact that they disagree?

    Is the point that one side is correct on every issue? If that's the case it's base neglect to not enlighten us to which party is 100% correct so that I can sign up!

  10. marque2:

    No that is not what he is saying at all. Warren frequently complains about the intransigence of the coke and Pepsi parties and yet he is intransigent himself on a few topics including immigration and Sheriff Joe, stop and frisk as well. He ignores issues like illegal immigrant crime, and overuse of social.services. He ignores that sheriff Joe has cut crime in the area and kept him safe from illegals as well. Stop and frisk has to be racist and not a well intentioned program to keep citizens safe in the highest crime areas, etc .

    There are two things going on here. One we all get stuck up on certain ideas, myself include. Two sometimes the upper middle class and wealthy don't understand what is going on with the rest of us. I am sure he hasn't been mugged by a gNg of illegals in his swanky neighborhood - so he think everything is grand. His neighbor Milly has an illegal gardener and everything seems swell. Well I was mugged by a Hispanic youth gang a few years back in my neighborhood a few years back - so I might be a bit more aware of the problem.

    This is why it is difficult when the elite try to make programs for the poor - they are elite because they have a different set of motivations and do not understand the people beneath them who do not react the same way.

    Note this is not a bash against Warren - and i made up the Milly bit - I can just understand skhpcola's complaint. I am actually grateful that Warren provide me with interesting points of view for free.

  11. irandom419:

    I fail to see any red in the largely blue politics now.

  12. marque2:

    That is pretty funny. They interviewed a bunch of former art majors as well. These are the types who almost always didn't have a car because they were counter culture or got their real money from a nearby restaurant job while waiting to be discovered.

    I tried using the train for three months from Long Beach to el.segundo . train stopped right next to my apartment and was about 2 blocks from work. Problem is j

  13. bryan fine:

    I disagree in general, but those are points you could have a discussion about.... You are giving the above comment way too much credit, it seemed to me a general rant attacking a lack of respect for the established parties. Not sure how you got from A to C.

  14. skhpcola:

    I have absolutely no respect for the D-party and scant respect for the R-establishment. I voted for Browne in '96, before Ron Paul became the titular paragon of Libertarian virtues. I am a conservative, first and foremost, with about 40% of classical liberalism (which is represented by none of the current national politicians), and 10% small "l" libertarian. I'd never vote for a filthy D-emocrat, I've voted against R-epubs, and routinely denigrate John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and their ilk. But within the narrow confines of pragmatic possibilities, you have two realistic choices: D- or R-. Libertarians will never be elected to either Congress or the presidency. Ever.

    My "general rant" was plainly and explicitly directed towards our unpaid proprietor for his unabashed hypocrisy and for trying too hard to be elitist, relative to other people and their beliefs. It's like a herd of leftists trying to one-up each other with progressive bona fides that somehow prove their loyalty to the cause. It's laughable to proudly and loudly announce your disdain for the two parties that will have a dual monopoly on national politics for the foreseeable future. I also pine for a party that could unseat the cretins that have corrupted both the institutions and processes of our federal government. But I'm not inane enough to believe that pooh-poohing support for either of those two parties is an enlightened or superior position to take. Warren (and many Libertarians) see it otherwise. You can revel in your unearned sense of the unattained high ground, but you will never see your candidate in Congress or as president. Principles are funny things...they are inconsequential when they mean nothing.

  15. marque2:

    So who got closer to understanding your point Bryan or I?

  16. bryan fine:

    So you are lambasting his "elitism" because it is a different shade than yours? I don't think you ever explained the hypocrisy you mention?

    My impression is that some unmanaged anger issues are clouding your thoughts... or at least your writing.

  17. skhpcola:

    You did, because Bryan is behaving exactly like Warren and myriad other Libertarians. Delusion and egocentric puffery is a hallmark of the neo-leftist Libertarians.

  18. bryan fine:

    I never claimed to be close to understanding the point, my view remains that there isn't one.

  19. skhpcola:

    If you are incapable of divining the difference between an achievable, pragmatic solution by changing the two political parties and being an insufferable ass that enjoys feeling smug in the belief that you are superior to others that choose the first option, that's your personal problem, not mine. I have no anger issues. I ridicule people that waste their time with normative solutions to very real and soluble problems...but those problems cannot and will not be solved via their methods or preferences. Contemporary leftist Libertarians equate very well to the hard-core Marxist D-ooshbags, who think that they will solve the nation's dysfunction, if they can simply get the power and control to do so. Those extremists have achieved positions in our current federal government, yet Libertardians fiddle away, mentally masturbating to visions of sugarplums and whatever else gives them a charge.

  20. skhpcola:

    Typical, for a troll. I'm not nuanced at all in what I say. Your passive-aggresssive bullshit is entertaining. Are you and LarryGeeGolly the same troll?

  21. marque2:

    So one of you is being hostile and the other snarkily dismissive. Both excellent ways to win the minds of ypu r opponents!

  22. bryan fine:

    "neo-leftist Libertarian" that's an interesting label, no idea what it means though. I'm a fan of the Chodorov theory that politicians should be shunned and shamed, as trying to influence them just increases there power. Isn't he a member of the "old right"?

    What's your "pragmatic plan" to influence the existing two parties? Is there a way to do it without supporting them and thus adding more fuel to their fire?
    You are long and venom and short on explanation...