Media


How would you begin a news article about a women’s magazine published by Al-Queda — what one might call “Jihad Cosmo”?  The Daily Mail opens with one of the most striking sentences in the history of journalism:

Al-Qaeda has launched a women’s magazine that mixes beauty and fashion tips with advice on suicide bombings.

Apparently, the magazine is full of timely advice for the complete woman:

Al-Shamikha magazine – meaning The Majestic Woman – has advice for singletons on ‘marrying a mujahideen’.

Readers are told it is their duty to raise children to be mujahideen ready for jihad.

And the ‘beauty column’ instructs women to stay indoors with their faces covered to keep a ‘clear complexion’.

After all, nobody likes a leather-skinned suicide bomber.
Advertisements

Ed Driscoll has a good blog post discussing how TV and movies distort our views of history, both through the unavoidably selective presentation of “reality” and through fictional artistry.  (I did not know that “follow the money” was not a phrase used by Watergate “Deep Throat” — it only appers in the movie.)

Along the way, he makes a very apt prediction:

… in 2000 years they’ll make movies about our era, and everyone will be half-naked and sweaty while they commit mortgage fraud.

Link: http://pajamasmedia.com/eddriscoll/2010/11/06/follow-the-truthiness/

Change you can believe in!

Perhaps you saw news footage of President Obama in Grand Isle, La., on Friday and thought things didn’t look all that bad. Well, there may have been a reason for that: The town was evidently swarmed by an army of temp workers to spruce it up for the president and the national news crews following him.

Jefferson Parish Councilman Chris Roberts, whose district encompasses Grand Isle, told Yahoo! News that BP bused in “hundreds” of temporary workers to clean up local beaches. And as soon as the president was en route back to Washington, the workers were clearing out of Grand Isle too, Roberts said.

“The level of cleanup and cooperation we’ve gotten from BP in the past is in no way consistent to the effort shown on the island today,” Roberts said by telephone. “As soon as the president left, they were immediately put back on the buses and sent home.”

Roberts says the overnight contingent of workers was there mainly to furnish a Potemkin-style backdrop for the event — while also making it appear that BP was firmly in command of spill cleanup efforts.

How long would this lead the news if BP had created a Potemkin village for George Bush?

via BP bused in 100s of temp workers for Obama visit, state official says – Yahoo! News.

The first in-depth, independent review of the effects of the recently-passed health care legislation contains very bad news for the Administration:

But the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president’s twin goal of controlling runaway costs, raising projected spending by about 1 percent over 10 years. That increase could get bigger, since Medicare cuts in the law may be unrealistic and unsustainable, the report warned.

It’s a worrisome assessment for Democrats.

In particular, concerns about Medicare could become a major political liability in the midterm elections. The report projected that Medicare cuts could drive about 15 percent of hospitals and other institutional providers into the red, “possibly jeopardizing access” to care for seniors.

The report from Medicare’s Office of the Actuary carried a disclaimer saying it does not represent the official position of the Obama administration.

This is no big surprise.  Anyone not in a coma had to know that the Administration’s claim that the new law would cut costs was not credible.

This does raise a big question for those who believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the myth of a non-partisan press: Where were the mainstream media and their tough questions during all those months that the Administration was making such cost-savings claims?

The media’s silence was deafening, and strongly implies a complicity in helping the Administration sell its program.

Accountability journalism: nuts.  Speaking truth to power: only to Republicans in power.

At this crucial time in our history, when we’re dealing with issues important to the present and crucial to the future, we have an Emily Litella government being “monitored” by a supine, Tickle Me Elmo press corps.

The mainstream media does not seem to be able to help itself.  But the market may force change: I expect that the MSM will continue to lose viewers and readers so long as it persists in reserving the hard questions only for conservatives.

via Report says health care will cover more, cost more – Yahoo! News.

UPDATE: It gets worse: According to the American Spectator‘s  “Washington Prowler” blog, the administration suppressed the Medicare Actuary’s report, which was submitted to the Secretary of HHS a week before the vote on the health care bill.

The economic report released last week by Health and Human Services, which indicated that President Barack Obama’s health care “reform” law would actually increase the cost of health care and impose higher costs on consumers, had been submitted to the office of HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius more than a week before the Congressional votes on the bill, according to career HHS sources, who added that Sebelius’s staff refused to review the document before the vote was taken.

“The reason we were given was that they did not want to influence the vote,” says an HHS source. “Which is actually the point of having a review like this, you would think.”

Apparently, honesty, like taxes, are for the little people.

via  http://spectator.org/archives/2010/04/26/what-lies-beneath

The economic report released last week by Health and Human Services, which indicated that President Barack Obama’s health care “reform” law would actually increase the cost of health care and impose higher costs on consumers, had been submitted to the office of HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius more than a week before the Congressional votes on the bill, according to career HHS sources, who added that Sebelius’s staff refused to review the document before the vote was taken.

“The reason we were given was that they did not want to influence the vote,” says an HHS source. “Which is actually the point of having a review like this, you would think.”