Greg Tinti shows how the Los Angeles Times spins information about connections between Iran and Iraqi forces fighting U.S. troops.
[A]s many of us in the blogosphere know, journalists do have a funny habit of putting information that’s inconvenient (you know, stuff that’s usually favorable towards the Bush adminisration) deep into a story so it doesn’t mess up the impression they’re trying to establish with the headline and the lede. See, they know full well that most readers only read the first hundred words or so to the get the gist and then move on. And by establishing a narrative in the beginning, they then can bury the other stuff and not be accused of journalistic negligence.
The L.A. Times does this?!?! Say it ain’t so!!!
Nice job by Tinti, who is referring to a little technique I like to call The Power of the Jump. Read his whole post for an excellent takedown of The Times — and an unflattering comparison of the paper with (heavens!) Michael Isikoff.
Comments Off on Greg Tinti Discovers The Power of the Jump
Bill Ardolino is in transit back to the U.S. but still has several more Iraq posts in the works. I’m glad he’s out of there, and I’m looking forward to the rest of his posts.
Comments Off on Bill Ardolino Returns to U.S.
We won’t have Kerry to kick around in the 2008 presidential campaign.
I’ve said all along, and I’ll repeat it now: we’re probably looking at President Hillary. Second guess: President Edwards.
Put ’em together on one ticket and they can’t be beat.
Scoff all you want. That’s how it looks to me.
(Link via Allah.)
UPDATE: Jules Crittenden says “there is no flip that can’t be flopped.”
Nifong’s been hit with a new ethics complaint. This one’s meatier than the earlier one, as it addresses his alleged suppression of exculpatory evidence. Allah says:
I’d bet my first child that he won’t disbarred.
I really feel like teasing him about that line, somehow, but I can’t find the right phrase. I’ll just leave it at this:
Don’t be too sure, my friend. And don’t go too far out on that limb.
UPDATE: Also via Allah is this link to the complaint itself.
The Congressional Black Caucus says that it was founded to allow its members “to address the legislative concerns of black and minority citizens.” So a newly elected representative asked to join. He is a “liberal” who ran “in a majority African American district.” He wanted to address the legislative concerns of the black and minority citizens in his district, and thought this would be a good way to do it.
He is also white.
The message got to him that they really didn’t want his type in their group:
Tennessee Democrat Stephen I. Cohen made a novel pledge on the campaign trail last year: If elected, he would seek to become the first white member of the Congressional Black Caucus.
Now that he’s a freshman in Congress, Cohen has changed his plans. He said he has dropped his bid after several current and former caucus members made it clear to him that whites need not apply.
“I think they’re real happy I’m not going to join,” said Cohen, who succeeded Rep. Harold Ford, D-Tenn., in the Memphis district. “It’s their caucus and they do things their way. You don’t force your way in. You need to be invited.”
Cohen said he became convinced that joining the caucus would be “a social faux pas” after seeing news reports that former Rep. William Lacy Clay Sr., D-Mo., a co-founder of the caucus, had circulated a memo telling members it was “critical” that the group remain “exclusively African-American.”
Other members, including the new chairwoman, Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, D-Mich., and Clay’s son, Rep. William Lacy Clay, D-Mo., agreed.
“Mr. Cohen asked for admission, and he got his answer. … It’s time to move on,” the younger Clay said. “It’s an unwritten rule. It’s understood. It’s clear.”
I wonder what would happen if they wrote down that rule.
(All links via Allah.)