* * * This message was from Amy Guskin to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m * * *
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

{at}MSGID: 
{at}REPLY:
>On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 20:02:35 -0400, Vorlonagent wrote
(in article ):

> 
> "Josh Hill"  wrote in message 
> news:31m8h2pio2ejiahp5gclbgak2gvgcaa1sj{at}4ax.com...
> 
>> 
>> The press (I dislike the term "media," which was a
cynical Agnewism
>> calculated to replace a revered term -- "press" -- with a vaguely
>> sinister one) issued a constant stream of reports on the Clinton
>> allegations, from rape to stolen ashtrays. When I compare
>> point-for-point the coverage of the Clinton allegations vs. comparable
>> Bush allegations, it becomes clear that as Amy pointed out the former
>> received much more attention. Compare, for example, two roughly
>> comparable allegations, Bush's illegal insider stock sale and
>> Whitewater.
> 
> You're comparing individual issues.  I am comparing overall treatment.  With 
> a noted exception or two, Clinton got a pass.
> 
> But if you want to talk specifics, what investigation DID the MSM do into 
> whitewater?  IIRC they pretty much took Ms. Clinton's word at face value.
> 
> I draw a distinction between reporting what someone else says and digging 
> for onr's own information.  I don't remember the MSM being very interested 
> in digging into whitewater.  It was simply something that dogged the 
> clintons and wouldn't go away.<<

It seems fairly arbitrary to declare that.  How is it any less all over the 
mainstream press ("mainstream" is one word, by the way, so
"MSM" isn't really 
a good shorthand for "mainstream media") just because some papers haven't 
done any investigative journalism on a story?  Repeating news by publishing 
it in your paper, or repeating it on your radio or television station, still 
counts as exposure, and if a story is untrue and damaging, endless repetition 
is _absolutely_ as meaningful to the subject of said smear.  Whatever 
distinction you think you're drawing, the fact is, most people receiving the 
news have no idea who's done the actual legwork, and who's just repeating 
something they picked up off the wires.  So the effect is identical.

Amy
     
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32