Patterico has completed Part 1 of his survey of the L.A. Times Annus Horribilis.
He's a conservative, who dislikes the Times' obvious bias because they're swinging for the other team.
I'm a liberal who dislikes it because their dishonesty blinds liberals and leads my team into doing stupid and arrogant things.
The Times has become a truly mediocre paper, sadly. We can hope for better.
Here are some quick tips for adding simple Textile formatting to your comments, though you can also use proper HTML tags:
*This* puts text in bold.
_This_ puts text in italics.
bq. This "bq." at the beginning of a paragraph, flush with the left hand side and with a space after it, is the code to indent one paragraph of text as a block quote.
To add a live URL, "Text to display":http://windsofchange.net/ (no spaces between) will show up as Text to display. Always use this for links - otherwise you will screw up the columns on our main blog page.
He's a conservative, who dislikes the Times' obvious bias because they're swinging for the other team.
That's a bit overly dismissive. Perhaps he is an American, who dislikes the Times' obvious bias because he doesn't like being lied to?
I don't think annoyance over media malfeasance is really reducible to partisan considerations, at least not for most people. It may be more easily perceivable when it cuts against one's own politics rather than with them, but the principle's the same.
Maybe in Pattico's second blog tomorrow, he'll touch on the California recall election and the womanizing article that the Times 'dropped' on either the Thursday or Friday before the Tuesday vote, timed to maximize the damage to Arnold.
At what point does the Times hit bottom?
The rot at the Times is complete and coveras all areas.
Consider their cheerleading for the Robert Blake defense, "Young Greg Haidl" aka "the Punk" as the OC Register columnist has dubbed him (the son of Millionaire developer and OC Assistant Sherrif Don Haidl, 19 year old Greg dropped roofies on a 16 year old and taped himself and his buddies violating her repeatedly). To make the hat trick complete, the Times has jumped on the defense bandwagon for Phil Spector "tormented by demons" etc. Damn I forgot, they also have been the "rip and read" outlet for Michael Jackson's defense attorney, and Geragos's defense of Scott Peterson.
The Times just repeats whatever garbage Defense Attorneys spew about their clients instead of doing actual investigating to get the facts straight, instead of repeating sliming of victims.
Their coverage of the Kobe Bryant stories, and the Dodger's owners plans to sell off Dodger Stadium for condos while dumping player salaries ala "Major League" has been non-existent. The Times didn't cover the LAX Police being paid for sleeping, eating, working other jobs, or Mayor Hahn's shakedowns of firms doing business with the City.
It's not just partisan politics, it's EVERYTHING in the newspaper. Even their coverage of Entertainment which should be the best is basically just rewriting (if that) studio press releases.
"Mediocre"?? Dishonest, deceitful, manipulative and unethical do not add up to "mediocre."
Can you agree that a newspaper should be judged by its respect for the truth, and for its readers?
What do you say to my argument that when the bias favors your side, it is still bias, and therefore by definition unethical and unprofessional?
News is facts, reported as honestly and accurately as practical (nobody's all-knowing or perfect). Opinion is not news. The LAT deceitfully mixes the two and then denies that it attempts to manipulate its readers; that makes it a dishonest propaganda organ. Yes or no?
Maybe in Pattico's second blog tomorrow, he'll touch on the California recall election and the womanizing article that the Times 'dropped' on either the Thursday or Friday before the Tuesday vote, timed to maximize the damage to Arnold.
Since that happened in 2003, I talked about it in my 2003 year-end review, which you can access here.
Excerpt:
Let me know what you think.First, I think I am an idiot (thanks for the gentle slap)! Time flies with with children.
That said, it is all coming back to me now...the inadvertent microphone being left on in the state capital, Grey's temper...there's so much going on in this great state that it all blends together.
Your essentially counterpoint rebuttal of major stories (whether 2003 or 2004) is the best source I have seen yet exposing any major media's bias.
This is the second/first largest metropolitan area in the USA. How can we settle for such CRAP (to put it benignly)? But they did hire a former Nissan? exec to help redesign the paper...made it narrower. How's that for responsiveness!!??
They even got to Larry Elder (who despises the times) to shill for them now!!!
I must put it all in perspective though...I've posted (lurked) elsewhere:
The media acts as a check on government, the bloggers act as a check on the media. You are the quinessential check on a major media outlet!
Pettico: I will add your site to my bookmarks (I'm not quite up to blogrolls yet...)
Again, thanks for the gentle reminder about Arnold...
Did I blink and miss it? When was the LAT not a mediocre (at best) paper? .. at least for the last 35 years, all I can speak of from experience
A.L.,
I don't think that hoping for better is a productive use of time. The Tribune company has no business reason to improve quality. I may be mistaken but I'll bet that the LAT lands on your doorstep every day. Should you cancel it, with what would you replace it? Near monopoly businesses have never been noted for attention to quality. TRB isn't going to make any changes until and unless subscriptions (and the ad revenue that they generate) fall significantly.
If wish to see an improvement at the LAT - cancel your subscription.