Just heard an interview with Amy Goodman in which she recounted a very interesting story that illustrates just how valuable independent media sources are in our system. (See link for full transcript)
This story describes how she took a call on election day in 2000, from then president Clinton, who was calling around to ask people to get out and vote. She took the opportunity to ask him a series of hard-hitting questions that the mainstream media would never dare ask, for fear of losing the rare access they are granted to administration officials (even rarer these days).
Although the president was at least willing to stay on the line and answer the questions, she was called the next day and told that she was banned from the white house from that point forward, because she didn’t ask the right questions.
29 Comments
i think jared only posted this so he could later reference it to “prove” that he doesn’t strictly bash “the right.”
No, just trying to show what I mean when I say that the mainstream media fails miserably in what it calls “journalism”, especially when it comes to the white house (whether “right” or “left”).
In the interview that I heard today, she was recounting this story to illustrate the gutlessness of mainstream media today, in that they would never ask such questions because they would be afraid of losing the small bit of access they’re allowed (as she did).
In all honesty it was probably because her questions were just really stupid. I do agree with you that independant media sources like Democracy Now serve an important purpose. They give normal folk an insight into the twisted mind that is the far left.
Which questions did you consider stupid (assuming you read the transcript)? How many times have you actually listened to Democracy Now? If you did you would realize that they often have real debates from both sides of many issues, unlike the many “far-right” radio shows.
I like what nathan and nate said, but I need to sstaayy away from these…this will be part of my political comment slowdown all the way to stop. It’s hard just to stop cold.
I think Nathan’s was more of a joke, and I don’t think Nate’s really made sense, at least not without more details. Thanks anyway for the non-comment, though. Maybe you could join/start a support group like RWCA (Right Wing Commenters Anonymous).
Don’t want to be an American idiot… na, na, na, na,na, na, na,na
Very good on the RWCA,
your new group ( joking also ) could be called the SWEAT - Socialists Who Examine America Tremariously.
this also incoporates my new word of the week
Michel, as someone with awesome word skills you can do better than that.
Dave, if temerariously is your word of the week, you should probably start spelling it right, then move on to applying it correctly.
As for Michel’s quote of the Green Day song, it was very appropriate. Maybe you just didn’t get the reference.
you dont win content debate points with the spelling correction though,
yes, didnt take the time to check spelling,
but you know it was funny for a quick response.
meaning is related to rashly.
not hip on greenday, but know hendrix.
In my mind proper spelling and grammar do go a long way in a debate, except of course in the minds of the people that use poor spelling and grammar. Especially in a written forum such as this, your points or opinions can be dramatically weakened by poor presentation.
Well written statements indicate that someone has at least taken the time to care about what they’re saying, as well as how other people will perceive it. Poorly written statements convey a perception in the reader’s mind (even if subconscious) of lack of intelligence on the part of the author, even such a perception may not be accurate in “real life”.
I don’t disagree, you have a valid point, I don’t think that well of a person’s “argument ” if the spelling, grammar and syntax are really bad, sometimes at work though if I coment I have to hurry ( I knew that was misspelled in the back of my mind and didn’t take the time to check it at dictionary.com ), also if there is a creative element in the structure of the idea flow I concentrate on that and than spelling can take a back seat with me.
Being a former teacher I have No excuse
Alright you got me, I just scanned the first half of the report and didn’t get to the transcript, but now that I have read it I totally stand by what I said.
I think it is obvious from the transcript that Amy Goodman was not interested in gaining meaningful responses from Clinton but just want ed to show how non-commie he was. Questions she asked were about complex issues that could not have been reasonably dealt with in such short interview even if the whole thing had been dedicated to that one subject. Not to mention Clinton probably came on the show with the understanding that he was going to simply tell people to get out and vote, not to defend his entire presidency.
The way she bombarded him and jumped around to a bunch of unrelated subjects, reminded me of a segment I heard earlier this week on KPFK (don’t remember what show. It was on Tuesday afternoon) where the guy giving a speech explained about 200 years worth of U.S. history in less than 15 minutes and concluded that people immigrate to the U.S. because of how bad the U.S. has screwed up the rest of the world. You like the blog type forum because of people like Amy Goodman and her aggressive, combative, non-constructive way of conversing.
You may find it surprising that I do listen to KPFK on occasion while I’m driving myself to work which usually ends up being Democracy Now, Sojourner Truth, Jerry “The Far Left’s Rush” Quiqly, and whatever other shows take Quigly’s spot on the days he’s not on. I’ve been listening since I moved back to CA a couple years back, although not religiously as I have other news/commentary sources I like/trust more. Also, when I ride the van pool, which is most of the time nowadays, we only listen to NPR.
When I do drive alone I usually switch over to KPFK in the morning when Morning Addition is doing those really long segments at the end of the hour on so and so’s 300 year old squirrel bone collection and whatnot. You know what I mean if you listen to the show.
I must say that out of all the shows on KPFK that I’ve heard, Democracy Now is the one I like best. I especially like it when they do extended
live coverage of important senate hearings (is that Democracy Now or do they just bump that show to play the hearings?) but I don’t kid myself that it is anything other far left advocacy radio. It is not balanced reporting and it’s not honest reporting.
By the way, I don’t listen to any far-right radio. I read the blogs, man. Powerline rules.
Ok Dave, how about: “If six, turns out to be nine, I don’t mind, I don’t mind…”
I’m not sure what you mean by “showing how non-commie he was”; are you suggesting that she was purposely asking questions that would make his answers portray him as more “centered” rather than “left”? If so, I doubt that’s the case.
I don’t think there’s anything that suggests that she was doing anything other than what she stated that she was doing: capitalizing on an extremely rare opportunity (even rarer these days, as I said before) to ask the president of the US some unprepared, non-preapproved questions live on the air. Yes, it did seem like she was jumping around a little bit, but you have to realize that she probably considered the fact that he was likely to hang up at any moment, so why not try to ask the kind of questions that a president would otherwise never answer, or even allow to be asked.
Ya, I guess I am kind of surprised that you listen to KPFK regularly, probably more regularly than me, actually. I catch Democracy Now via their podcast, and most of the other shows (especially the ones you mentioned, the local morning and afternoon shows) are just as bad as the right wing shows that I criticize in terms of their lack of open-mindedness, so I don’t really listen to them.
In fact, now that I think about it, the only time I usually listen to KPFK is for the news (specifically the Free Speech Radio News pieces), or if I am in my car on Wednesday nights (8pm) for Middle East In Focus with Don Bustany, which is an excellent show. The host is very knowledgeable of the history of the region, and frequently takes calls from people who disagree with him strongly, and he discusses and debates with them in a calm, respectful manner.
That being said (the fact that I personally don’t enjoy most of the shows) I still have a tremendous degree of respect and value for KPFK and the other Pacifica network affiliates, since they are really the only independent outlets that will allow people without monetary power and influence to have a voice, especially in light of the recent disgusting developments in public media (CPB vs. NPR/PBS).
The extended coverage of the senate hearings and such is usually covered by the Pacifica radio network, of which KPFK is a member, along with two stations in northern CA, one in New York (WBAI) and I think one in Texas as well. This is a shining example of the kind of respectable journalism service that they provide.
I remember listening to the coverage of the UN meetings before the invasion of Iraq, during which most of the other TV and radio networks only covered the statements presented by the *few* pro-invasion countries, whereas Pacifica covered the entire hearings uninterrupted, during which country after country after country came forward and called on the US to do the right thing, for hours. It was pretty powerful.
Also, I don’t think that Democracy Now would dispute that they present what most would consider a “left” perspective. I would take issue with your assertion that it is not “honest” journalism, however; you can be honest and still maintain a strong (even unbalanced) position on issues that you believe in.
They are very up front about their opinions (or “slant”) in that regard, unlike certain other news networks, which claim to be “fair and balanced” while in reality being every bit as slanted to the other side - that’s what I call dishonest.
I haven’t read Powerline before, although I did just quickly check it out. My first impressions weren’t too positive, but that’s to be expected. They sell shirts that proclaim such humanitarian slogans as “peace through superior firepower”. Their opinions on Iraq seem to be pretty flawed as well: in the most recent story they discuss a recent Pew report that shows a decline in terrorism, and the author goes out of his way to attribute the decline to the war in Iraq, even though the study (or any other evidence) doesn’t suggest anything of the kind.
I also noticed that their blog doesn’t seem to allow for comments; apparently they’re not interested in the opinions of those who would disagree with them.
Whatever, Jared. They aren’t selling shirts, they sell ads, and if they don’t agree with you then their opinions must be flawed.
You don’t attribute the rise of democracy in the middle east and around the world in any way to the war in Iraq or Bush’s foreign policy in general? That’s pretty ridiculous.
If you read what they have to say for a while you’ll see that they are very sharp guys who write a lot of insightful, thought provoking, fact based commentary.
I’m pretty sure Democracy Now touted the wildly inaccurate (and suspect from the day the study was released) 100,000 Iraqi civilians dead number like it was gospel truth for a long time. To me, that’s dishonest.
I thought Goodman asked Clinton a question about if he felt bad for moving the Democratic party too far to the right, which gave momentum and support to Nadar and split the party base. So yes, I don’t think she would have any problem painting Clinton as a centrist pro-corporation pig.
Michel - very nice, you are fluent in hendrix too?
I have been impressed when I read your writing and now the green day thing went right by me.. this is why -
Purple haze all in my brain
Lately things just don’t seem the same
… Actin’ funny but I don’t know why ’scuse me while I kiss
the sky Purple haze all around Don’t know if I’m comin’ up or down …
got to see hendrix new years eve 69 at the fillmore east.
Tickets were $ 3.50.
Like I said, I didn’t look at it too closely, so it’s my mistake to say that they sell those shirts directly; they just sell ad space to the company that sells the shirts (although I’m guessing they don’t disagree with the sentiment, at least not enough to stop them from accepting their money).
I have never said or even implied that anyone who doesn’t agree with me automatically has flawed opinions. I’m not sure where you get that from. Sure I state my opinions strongly, since I believe in them, and I believe that I have good facts to back them up, but I don’t consider any of them to be worth any more than anyone else’s.
I did comment that I believe their opinion (the small excerpt that I read) regarding the war in Iraq being somehow related to the decline in terrorism within Islamic countries mentioned in the report their post referenced was flawed, and I still believe it is.
Here is why: the report that this post is supposedly about makes no such references or correlations. In fact, (if you read it) it actually points out that in some of the countries that they list positively in their post (two of the four: Lebanon and Morocco, plus Jordan) which have seen the favorable declines also have about half of the total population of respondents who feel differently about the Iraq situation specifically, saying that suicide bombings against westerners in Iraq are justified.
Notice how they conveniently neglected to mention that part of the study and then further go on to claim the exact opposite - that these countries are in fact being positively inspired by US actions in Iraq. Sorry, it just doesn’t add up.
As for a move towards “democracy” in the middle east being credited to the Iraq invasion and occupation or the Bush administration’s foreign policy in general, I don’t see any evidence that would indicate such a causal relationship. Feel free to pass some on, if you know of any.
I will certainly admit that there may be some countries who are putting on a good face and becoming more friendly with the US, especially those that have an interest in keeping their names off the hit list. If that’s what democracy is all about, then ya, I guess we’re really advancing it.
But I kind of wonder whether democracy at gunpoint is really democracy at all. If there were the level of foreign military occupation here domestically that there is in Iraq right now, would you feel that you are living in a “free” country? In fact, when I look at the some of the administration’s domestic actions like the Patriot Act (and it’s proposed extensions and additions) and the “Free Speech Zones” created by this administration specifically designed to stifle and silence dissent, I kind of wonder if we’re the right country to be campaigning and exporting our brand of “democracy” to the rest of the world.
I will give Powerline a shot (I’ve added it to my RSS reader) and see what they have to say for a while, with an open mind. I will say that they at least seem to be intelligent and effective communicators, despite the somewhat misleading tactics I mentioned above.
As for numbers, I don’t really remember whether DN specifically quoted those numbers or not, but I don’t really see the point. If it’s only tens of thousands (which I believe most everyone agrees to) rather than 100K, that doesn’t make much difference to me.
It’s still an illegal invasion and occupation under international law, which they cannot deny. The administration still lied to justify it, which is indisputable, based solely on their own words as evidence.
Re: the Goodman / Clinton question, yes, that was the point. I thought that you were suggesting that she was purposefully doing that to try to give him some brownie points with the moderates, kind of a staged thing; that’s what I was disagreeing with.
Just read another post from the Powerline site, regarding the Joe Wilson / Valerie Plame issue, and noticed how they pretty much just go over the some of the talking points distributed by the RNC which attempt to confuse the issue by attempting to attack Wilson’s credibility and bickering over whether the blatantly obvious retaliatory outing of his wife as payback for him revealing the administration’s deceitful Niger uranium story was technically illegal. Reading that kind of thing (the talking points memo, linked above) is sickening to me. I know both parties probably do it, and what’s worse is it ends up achieving the desired effect, steering the public’s attention away from the real underlying issue at hand.
It’s really too bad that these guys don’t allow comments on their site. I guess they don’t want to deal with comments / questions like these.
So you don’t think the protests that forced Syria out of Lebanon were influenced in any way by the what’s going on in Iraq?
Reporting suspect numbers as hard facts is lying.
Interesting that you bring up the Syria/Lebanon issue, since it was the united voice of the UN security council nations, as well as pressure from other local countries that eventually achieved the desired result; no invasions and occupations necessary.
To say that it was influenced (positively) or coerced (negatively) by what we’ve done in Iraq is nothing more than speculation.
As I said previously regarding the numbers, I don’t know if DN in particular did report them, and if so, whether they reported them as “hard facts”. If that is the case, then I would concede that it was a lie; I have no obligation to defend them if they’ve done something wrong.
Now let’s hear you (by that same standard) admit that the statement “we have evidence that leaves no doubt” was also a lie, in light of the fact that their “evidence” was not only suspect but in many cases directly contradicted.
Dave, looks like there’s some nasty Crosstown Traffic here. Why can’t we be Bold as Love. After all, (new reference) Everybody Knows This is Nowhere.
been all along the watchtower too long trying to escape my inner voodo child, slight return.
( new reference ) can’t find by way home and want to get back on the sea of love this weekend away from this white room.
I have the tire tracks all across my back..
This is getting too weird. Let’s stop.
ok, please dont be insulted - do you know the last reference? I made a mistake it was two groups in the last refernce but one same group member.
once at blockbuster my son answered my different questions with a different video cover that was handy, it was fun for 2 minutes.
Interesting that you think it’s so obvious that it was pressure from the UN, and neighboring countries that had the most influence on the happenings in Lebanon while the affect of Bush’s foreign policy can only be speculated.
I am deeply disturbed by lack of WMDs, but I do think it is possible that many people inside and outside the Bush administration were absolutely convinced by the evidence they had that there were vast amounts of illegal weapons in Irag.
I guess it’s all speculation, as far as Lebanon goes, but the UN stuff was directly related to the situation, whereas Iraq is certainly more of an assumption of indirect influence.
I don’t buy that excuse regarding the WMDs. If they said “we believe there’s WMDs” or even “based on our best evidence, we believe…” then that would be one thing, although there have been numerous reports from intelligence officials who have said that they were told not to present any evidence to the contrary, so even then they can’t say “based on our best evidence…” when they were actively ignoring and suppressing evidence.
But even if that weren’t the case, they said “we have evidence which leaves no doubt” which was clearly a lie. As you yourself said above, reporting suspect information as hard facts is lying; there is no denying this, and the evidence they had was suspect. Especially since it turned out to be wrong, it could not have been “evidence that leaves no doubt”.