Well, I guess somebody had to do the work, but is it really a surprise? I must admit that I only skimmed the article. The information was nothing that I didn't expect. Do you think that it will be more than on news cycle and then sluffed off.
I mean really isn't it more important to attack Obama's patriotism? Or to slander Clinton with sexist slurs?
UPDATE: No coverage what a surprise. It is something I have seen and read before. I once watched a reporter who was there for the invasion of East Timur complaining about the lack of coverage. Another reporter said something to the effect that you can't really complain, because there was some coverage, and anyway people didn't care and that is why there wasn't more. The other guy, a seasoned correspondent simply pointed out that if the media wanted to cover it they covered it (whatever it might be) in depth and for days and days.
That is both true, and the way the media in this country covers themselves. Things are always covered, somewhere, one time. Then those articles can be later pointed out to prove that American Media really do cover the important stories. Of course, the NYT piece about the military isn't being followed up on by anyone. I am will to bet that there will be less follow up coverage than the coverage of Obama's pastor, o lapel pin. Hell, there was less coverage of the fact that the president admitted approving torture then there has been of that damned lapel pin.
No comments:
Post a Comment