It was just one line at the end of a segment.
But it spoke volumes about the way a media willing to look the other way saved Ted Kennedy's political career at the time of Chappaquiddick.
Jim Pinkerton made the observation on yesterday's Fox News Watch at the very end of the segment on the media's treatment of Kennedy's death.
JIM PINKERTON: I got to say that if the media had been more alert to Kennedy after Chappaquiddick, he would have ended up like Gary Condit.Can anyone doubt the truth of what Pinkerton posited? Condit was a conservative Dem who voted against Pres. Clinton more than any member of his party. After the murder of Chandra Levy, Condit, under a barrage of negative coverage, was unable to hold onto his congressional sseat.
The irony is that Condit was ultimately exonerated in the death of Levy, whereas Kennedy, who lived to become the proverbial liberal Lion of the Senate, was undeniably liable for the death of Mary Jo Kopechne.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Or, if the media didn't
August 30, 2009 - 13:40 ET by ThisnThatOr, if the media didn't fawn over the paux-president Obama, we might have learned the truth of his radical politics and friends.
Better yet, how about the media simply doing the job the Constitution demands? What a concept!
___________________________________
"Tax the rich" is a basically unstable way of governing - The NYT
....or if they hadn't
August 30, 2009 - 13:42 ET by motherbelt....or if they hadn't championed John McCain as his opponent...
Oh, wait! That's redundant after yours....
Um, no
August 31, 2009 - 03:34 ET by danebramage"Better yet, how about the media simply doing the job the Constitution demands?"
TnT, comments like these disturb me because they make me think you don't understand the Constitution (big 'C' and little 'c') of the United States. The law demands nothing of the press qua press. That is, in fact, the very point and purpose of the First Amendment. The First Amendment prohibits Congress from making any law "abridging the freedom...of the press." (Thus, there is, in point of fact, no "Fourth Estate," or fourth branch, of government in the United States. Such talk merely reflects the important role a free, independent, privately directed press plays in checking the ambitions of potential tyrants and enemies of the people.)
The Constitution anticipates and assumes the existence of the press, but doesn't mandate, or demand, that a single newspaper, magazine, radio station, or television station even exist at all.
P.S. in case you're tempted to assume I'm some kind of liberal troll come here to stir up trouble with my clever lies, you should remember that the Bill of Rights is the product of Revolutionary-era conservatives like Patrick Henry, not early "progressive" liberals as is commonly believed (not least of all by said deluded liberals themselves). It was the Anti-Federalists--the states'-rights-loving haters of centralized, consolidated power in government--who demanded the inclusion of its provisions as a prerequisite of their support for the proposed Constitution.
Pinkerton
August 30, 2009 - 13:43 ET by rockyracoonBias is not only what is reported, but how and what is stated and not stated. If the Chappaquidick story was covered like the Conduit/Levy story I can't imagine even Mass. voters keeping Kennedy in the Senate.
I don't know, rocky...I
August 30, 2009 - 14:10 ET by Kat Outta the BagI don't know, rocky...I really believe many of them will always be blinded by the Kennedy name.
I really believe many of
August 30, 2009 - 20:10 ET by Dan The Man 2I really believe many of them will always be blinded by the Kennedy name.
It always makes me pretty much blind with disgust and rage about the priviliged "Roya" family.
Good for Pinkerton. I still
August 30, 2009 - 13:46 ET by Chris NormanGood for Pinkerton. I still say (see my comment in the Kurtz post) it's time to get some fresh voices on News Watch. Mark or anyone else from the MRC or NewsBusters would be more knowledgeable and incisive on the subject of media bias.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Thanks, Chris. I actually
August 30, 2009 - 13:57 ET by Mark FinkelsteinThanks, Chris. I actually miss Neal Gabler's presence on the show. Infuriating at times, he was provocative and entertaining.
Hey Mark...I like that
August 30, 2009 - 14:02 ET by bigtimerHey Mark...I like that suggestion from Chris...you'd be great, especially after watching you on the Fox Business Channel not that long back... ;-)
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
Mark,
August 30, 2009 - 14:17 ET by Chris NormanI think you're right. Also, it seems to have grown more generic or lost something I can quite put my finger on - since the old host left. I think the anti-bias side would be stronger with people who actually specialize on the subject. Of course, it doesn't necessarily work in reverse too well. Poor Jane Hall, a journalism professor, frequently makes herself look silly in denying the undeniable and defending the indefensible. While Kirsten Powers still appears to be a Democrat operative despite her new title as "columnist" and Judy Miller is just, well, knee jerk partisan, I guess - I can't get past her goofy giggling.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Chris...wasn't that Eric
August 30, 2009 - 14:29 ET by bigtimerChris...wasn't that Eric Burns you're referring to?
Whatever happened to him I wonder?
I've only been able to catch the show here and there nowadays...John Scott took his place last I saw.
Agree with your perfect descriptions of Judy, Judy, Judy, Kirsten, and of course good ol' Professor Jane Hall...sounds like some of the crew from Gilligan's Island.
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
bt - hah!
August 30, 2009 - 14:48 ET by Chris NormanLOL! "Gilligan's Island" - that's classic.
Yes, Eric Burns. He was no conservative, but was a great neutral host. Somehow, by having a Fox News staffer anchor the program, it's made the whole thing more generic or something. The show is getting tired and needs some new voices and views. It also would benefit from people who can cite statistics, etc, regarding bias. Pinkerton, Thomas, and occasionally Lowry do okay, but media bias isn't their specific area of interest. I want to see Mark, Noel, or Tim throw their notebooks down, jump out of their chairs, and get in Judy's and Kirsten's faces. Not really - just kidding. Well, maybe a little serious... :)
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
NEWS WATCH...
August 30, 2009 - 20:51 ET by danybhoyI miss Neal Gabler as well, he was really held his own while presenting his opinion, usually left. He did a good job, & I miss that. I almost never agreed with him, but his point of view & the way he presented it was something of value.
"...How blind can you be, don't you see...
...that the gambler lost all he does not have..."
Nightwish
Pinkerton is dead on the
August 30, 2009 - 14:00 ET by bigtimerPinkerton is dead on the money...and we all know it...yet the msm cannot help themselves...heck, now we are supposed to believe that O will be carrying on the Kennedy name...heck, we aren't even sure of O's legal last name.
Oops, wait a second, I forgot, he's the messiah of Camelot now...has a 'D' after his name and is now carrying on the 'torch' for the Kennedy name.
How hilarious us all of this...really...it's absurdity at it's best.
Here's some good news for us...let's hope this keeps on growing until '10! ;-)
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
Double Standards Rule (If You're A Democrat)
August 30, 2009 - 14:07 ET by rammingspeedThe same people who can't see the double standard with these two cases are the same ones who are dedicated to the global warming crap, and believe that Sheik Khalid Mohammed's "rights" were violated. They aren't stupid, they're sick.
Liberals, by comparison, make sewage smell good.
August 30, 2009 - 17:21 ET by needleYou are so right.
These liberals dismiss abortion, no matter at what stage of pregnancy, as not a matter of murder, but choice!
These liberals have employed post-modern perverted philosophical nonsense to push sin out of their consciousness, at least insofar as it applies to one of their own, Kennedy being a gold plate example.
And yet these liberals employ whatever moral argument they can lay their hands on to promote their godless agenda. And if that were not hypocritical enough, they are super-over-eager to morally judge and persecute the errors and missteps of those they feel interfere with the liberal agenda, even though it would apparently not ever cross their mind that there would be anything wrong if a liberal were to do such things. Whatever lying liberals and particularly the liberal media employ to get this done, is all for the greater good.
- Relying upon the State Run Media for your information is like relying upon an embezzler for your portfolio management.
Newshole
August 31, 2009 - 04:38 ET by Jack BauerI find the problem with Newswatch to be slightly different to those posited by other posters.
The show is formatted as almost a visual Newsbusters looking at bias in the media.
But instead of four panelists going on an all out assualt of perceived bias, what often happens is that the two "conservatives" attack the bias; while the two liberals defend, or pooh-pooh the idea that there was/is any bias anyway.
I would much rather see the liberals attacking what they percieve as media bias.
I just find media insiders defending the media in a show meant to be critical of the media to be... uh BORING.
That's the equivalent of a no news story.
It's not as if the media doesn't have plenty of smug defenders from within its own ranks.
The
August 31, 2009 - 09:16 ET by jessieHThe MSM allowed a murderer to go free. Their time is about up.