Monday, January 01, 2007

Just the Facts?

[posted by Callimachus]

Our newspaper photographers and photo editors are under orders, when they shoot pictures of anti-war and anti-Bush demonstrations and marches, such as the one held this evening in honor of the "grim milestone," to avoid views of the scene that would show newspaper reporters and editors among the demonstrators. Some nights its a damned difficult job. Isn't that something readers "need to know?"

I see bumper stickers around town: 1.20.09, or whatever the date is when whoever succeeds Bush will take office. The Constitution, as amended, wisely preserves us from being ruled by the same idiot forever. What is the date you can look forward to for a different set of editors and news producers? Bloggers often go overboard in criticizing the media, failing to understand the difference between true bias and the simple, nasty business of reporting. But without the posse bolgitatus you'll be inflicted with the same Eason Jordans forever. You will anyhow. At least this way you get the visceral satisfaction of seeing the ethically challenged numbskulls occasionally run out of town -- and into lucrative speaking/publishing contracts to tour the nation carping about conservatives.

UPDATE: And guess who gets to set the number figure for the protest turnout as it appears in the news story on the front page tomorrow -- the reporter who covered the demonstration and wrote the story, or a copy editor who was in it? And guess which one has the higher number?