It Should've Been An InterrogationThis morning on C-SPAN2, the National Press Club held a conferrence regarding journalism and blogging that featured panelists ranging from Mathew Yglesias, Wonkette's Ana Marie Cox, and former White House hack Jeff Gannon (most likely representing the corner of Virginia Ave. and 19th Street nowadays). John Aravosis at AmericaBlog served up LIVE play-by-play as the event unfolded and the lads at Crooks & Liars ripped videos so if you want juicy details, head on over there, check it out, and consider droping a few bills to keep 'em afloat.
Personally, I'm just gonna sit here and regret not being able to attend (due to distance and financial reasons) while harboring a complaint that nobody in this whole building full of journalists and bloggers had asked "The Burning Question" (e.g. "How were you able to get a daily press pass for 2 years, Jeff?") they way I believe it should've been asked. Everyone knows that in journalism (and in interrogations, come to think of it) it's not necessarily the question you ask; it's how you ask it. Formulating the question in a certain way will get different results and ff I could've been there, I would've asked it in a completely different way which either would've resulted in three things: (1) an actual answer, (2) a prompt escort out of the event, or (3) a sea of dumbfounded faces.
How would I have worded that question:
Hello, I'm Jay Sizemore and I'm the author of a blog entitled "TBT: The Brutal" Truth. My question to the panel would be more appropriate when addressed to everyone in this room but for the sake of time, the panel can answer this while anyone else in this room may give me their answer after the event. So, with that said my question is how is it that Jeff Gannon for 2 years straight was able to get within shooting range -- be it by bullets or seman -- of our Commander-In-Chief?"
Do you catch the difference? See, when the "Burning Question" is asked in the former way, it automatically lets all those journalists in the audience whom represent the mainstream media (folks that not only lanquished in the same room with him for 2 years but also have time and time again dropped the ball on the details of the entire story) completely off the hook when they don't deserve to be off the hook (I'll get to the reason why shortly). Asking the question my way would have been the equivilent of taking the head of Jeff Gannon with one hand along with the heads of those mainstream media journalists with the other, and mercilessly bashing them together with a deafening *THOCK* that would've reverberated into the ears of everyone watching. Ana Marie would've pissed her pants, John Avarosis would've gleefully shitted in his own, Billmon would've strangled himself on his morning scotch, DailyKOS would've been speechless (save for a thread entitled "O...M...G!"), and those Powerline/Freepers would've had a flatlining stroke. Last (and certainly not least) Jeff Gannon would have been embarrased yet once again and the MSM would've been exposed for the lazy, money-grubbing, chicken-shit bastards they are to millions of viewers. That is exactly what needed to be done at this event LIVE on camera and, sadly, was not.
Since we get nothing but spin from Gannon, the only reason why we should be asking the question to him is to make sure his own pecker steals the spotlight every single time Gannon's ego seeks to bask in the sonofabitch. For the real answer, we should be hammering relentlessly on the MSM, our elected representatives, and The Bush Administration, mainly the MSM. Why such a focus on MSM? Easy -- the MSM keeps telling us that asking loaded questions to the Bush Administration is a sure-fire way to get punished. That alone communicates the idea that the media in this country no longer believes that their Constitutional protections will guard them from a pissed off President gone rogue. If the media no longer has faith in the Constitution, it should tell us that we shouldn't either. At least until Bush is gone (and that's if we even have a Constitution left). Simply unconscionable ...
If we lavish the MSM with the napalm they so rightfully deserve, they might just wake up one day, throw off their self-imposed shackles of oppression, and start holding Bush's feet to the fire. Clearly their oppression is self-imposed because we all know that rights and protections in the Consititution are useless when not excercised and the MSM's rolling over for Bush while kvetching about punishment if they don't is the most ridiculous and pussy-whipped copout I've ever seen from an institution that previously used to thrust the "Freedom Of The Press" in the air as if it were a Bic lighter at a Journey concert, for crying out loud.
The MSM shouldn't get one single drop of sympathy until they quit sitting on their lazy asses waiting for someone to come along an empower them. Instead, the burden of empowerment -- as an exhaustted Rosa Parks discovered many years ago -- lies squarely on their shoulders. They've got to stand up and empower themselves using the Constitution. Repeatedly. Defiantly. Ram that motherfucker down the throats of the Bush Administration as often as their right-wing enablers like to ram the Bible down everyone elses. They'll eventually start doing this if we keep beating them over the heads with the truth and the truth lies ever so conveniently in their apathetic and inconsistant coverage.