How Low Can They Go?
I don’t see how Rupert Murdock can ever reduce that standards of the Wall Street Journal‘s editorial page when it already publishes dreck like Propaganda Redux.
The author is one Ion Mihai Pacepa, who is identified by an enterprising headline writer with the phrase: “Take it from this old KGB hand: The left is abetting America’s enemies with its intemperate attacks on President Bush.”
First off, the author was a Lieutenant General with the Romanian security apparatus, not the KGB, and the Romanians were not major players during the Cold War. The Romanians were not favored in the Eastern Bloc, not simply because they were non-Slavs, although that played a part to the xenophobic Soviets, it was mostly because they were allied with Hitler and invaded the Soviet Union from the South.
Now, it is true that they shifted sides in the Summer of 1944, but by that time it was rather obvious that they were about to be swept up by the Soviet army, and were trying to earn some points. Pacepa’s charming story about his father admiring Harry Truman overlooks a good deal of history.
His suggestion that the low international standing of the US is because the Democrats say bad things about the Shrubbery, is the most absurd thing I’ve read recently. It may come as a shock, but a lot of people don’t like bullies, especially bullies who go around blowing things up. The admiration expressed for Stalin after World War II was because the Soviet Army played a major role in getting rid of Hitler, not because the Politburo said nice things about him. People remember Harry Truman because the Marshall Plan helped to rebuild Europe, it most definitely wasn’t because people said nice things about Harry.
12 comments
That’s editorial.
Consider the WSJ news department.
I covered that earlier.
The editorial page is famous for being the looniest patch of media real estate anywhere outside of a Scientology convention or Sun Myung Moon’s compound. But the rest of the paper does enjoy something of a reputation for fairness and balanced reporting, albeit on a rather narrow front. I suspect that may be what most people are worried that Murdoch and his Faux News crew will change.
Me, I couldn’t possibly care less. Never read the Journal, and I’m surely not going to start now!
The business coverage is considered the gold standard. If its quality starts to lag, it will become just another tabloid.
Is there any NoiseCorpse property you do not consider now to be a tabloid?
There is nothing wrong with a bias, as long as you admit and publicize the bias. Murdock refuses to admit the slant of his media, and keeps claiming to provide straight news. Unfiltered news is the rarest of gems.
To truly be a tabloid you have to feature boobs and blood, so some of his properties haven’t quite reached that nadir. They are, however, all deeply biased, with fact checking optional.
“To truly be a tabloid you have to feature boobs and blood,so some of his properties haven’t quite reached that nadir.”
I don’t know about that; Bush and Cheney appear pretty frequently in all his media…
bush and cheney: dolts with blood on their hands…
Things are never so bad but what they can’t get worse — the WSJ included.
If the Federal Reserve and government don’t start paying attention to what is going on in the markets, they are going to see a lot of their friends in major trouble.
The WSJ should start reporting on how bad things really are, because if the Fed doesn’t start to drop rates we are in for a nasty landing after a really bad fall.
I would wonder if the Journal and other financial media are going to hide the truth like they did during the early days of the Great Depression.
Here would be their response. To blame irrational pessimism.
I don’t guess he watches Jim Cramer, or saw the 300 point drop in the Dow today.