Posted by: Andy | October 18, 2007

Truth in reporting? Never.

Or, I could have called it “How news headlines are like the WB’s commercials for Gilmore Girls” (only 1 person will get this joke, and it was still worth it!).

I was reading the news on the crapper today. On my phone. Because I can. And because I’m tired of looking at Kid Rock’s ugly ass mug on the cover of Rolling Stone’s 2007 Hot Issue. WTF? The only way he’s hot is in the sense of “Drop him like he’s _____!” And, no I don’t mean whatever double entendre that phrase originally referred to – I mean drop him like a fuckin heavy sack of rocks. You don’t want people to see you carrying that around in public

The headline on the story reads: “Michelle Obama Joins Hillary Bashing.” (Yes, there’s a period there, I thought that was odd too). The actual story is here, at (note that it is just reporting on another reported story – is that still reporting? Or meta-reporting? Or is it just blogging?), but I’ll save you the trouble of reading it. Here’s the text in it’s entirety:

ABC News’ Sunlen Miller Reports: In advance of her trip tomorrow to fundraise overseas in London, Michelle Obama, wife of Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama D-Ill., mirrored her husband’s attacks this week going after frontrunner Hillary Clinton in an interview with the Sunday Times. You can read the article HERE.

Linking Hillary and Bill to old hat, Mrs. Obama compares them to “the same suit and defies the sense that Hillary is the “inevitable” candidate because she doesn’t have the most money nor the biggest base of donors. Mrs. Obama also addresses the issue of Clinton being a polarizing figure.

“Nothing is inevitable,” said Mrs. Obama, vowing that her husband was a “uniter” who could beat Clinton to the party nomination.

Asked if she thought Clinton was a polarising figure, she replied: “That is definitely one of the challenges she faces. You can see it in the surveys.”

“People know Hillary and Bill, so their first instinct is to say: well, I’ve heard of these people,” she said. “But the more people see Barack, the more they like him. His favourable ratings are higher and, to top it off, he has brought in more money than any other candidate from a broader base of support.”

“The ‘inevitable’ candidate has not raised the most money and doesn’t have the biggest base of donors . . . So where’s the ‘inevitability’?”

“Sometimes we wear the same suit even if it’s got holes in it. We need a new suit, not just a new tie or new pants.

OK. So, where in there do we see ANY HILLARY BASHING?????

The lady fucking says “Hillary is not inevitable.” This is true.

She agrees that Hillary is a polarizing figure…there’s nothing negative about that at all. A female canditate, a black candidate, hell a dog running for office – anything not a white male is polarizing…so that can’t be it.

I understand that you’re going to tweak the headlines to try and get folks attention, but what the fuck ABCNews? You should be ashamed. Especially at this point in our countries juncture, we should be trying to show the world that we can rise above all the media bullshit that made our political circus even more drunken elephant than before. Drunken elephant like a REAL drunken elephant (picture it trying to balance on a ball, then falling and killing Dumbo and you’ll get my drift), not some juvenile slam on Republicans.

[edit: this is from last week…I accidentally hit “save” instead of “publish” :P]



  1. I thought I commented on this..? Yeah, I think that’s so lame to be sensational to the point of misleading. It’s a vicious cycle in journalism: to tell the truth and to make it newsworthy. Sometimes priorities rear their ugly heads, though. Also, on a somehow related topic, that whole thing about Halle Berry’s “anti-semitic” comment on Leno where she says she looks like her Jewish cousin in a pic where her nose looks big? Um, shouldn’t we reserve a word so inflammatory for events when it’s, you know, actually called for? Unless now we’re saying there’s something wrong or untrue about the stereotype of Jewish people generally having larger-than-white-people noses… wait, why is that offensive unless you think one is better than the other. Exactly. If you note that my nose is way wider than Josh’s, you’re obviously racist.

  2. You shall now find the above comment as a portion of my own blog.

  3. Are you going to move your blog out from myspace into the world?

    It seems like once in a super rare while, my browser just eats a comment I post – it happened to me once with Jen’s blog. Could be some kind of server issue on their side?

    I think these days most mainstream “journalism” is too driven by the ad$$ bottom line…I was reading something somewhere a month or so ago about how TV networks used to always take losses on their news shows – that was acceptable and “good” because they were providing a public service, so they didn’t shoot for those big ad dollars & they didn’t have to ass kiss so much with their reporting.

    Of course now networks try and make as much money from their news as their shows, so we of course get fucked in the ear. Ewww.

    I hadn’t seen the thing about Halle. That is pretty damn stupid.

  4. Yeah, I’d like to understand why the channel three news in Sacramento – ie the regular world – began including “entertainment news stories”? Are you serious? There’s a reason I don’t live in SoCal. On a related topic, I remember seeing Stan Atkinson at Costco a few times and being starstruck. Back when I wanted to be in broadcast journalism. Wait, I still do. But in a fantasy, I also wanna be Optimus Prime way. Or a mercenary.


%d bloggers like this: