Paul Krugman (emphasis mine):
I don’t watch cable news, or actually any kind of TV news. But I gather that there’s a virtual blackout on the huge demonstrations in Wisconsin, except on Fox, which portrays them as thuggish and violent.
What that makes me think of is January-February 2003, when anyone watching cable news would have believed that only a few kooks were opposed to the imminent invasion of Iraq. It was quite spooky, realizing that hundreds of thousands of people could march through New York, and by tacit agreement be ignored by news networks whose headquarters were just a few blocks away.
And it’s even more spooky to see it happening all over again.
Yes, everyone outside the Krugman cave knows that no one is paying attention to the Madison protests, except people who watch CBS :
Or ABC:
http://abcnews.go.com/assets/player/walt2.6/flash/SFP_Walt_2_65.swf
http://abcnews.go.com/assets/player/walt2.6/flash/SFP_Walt_2_65.swfOr any of the NBC affiliated cable stations:
http://plus.cnbc.com/rssvideosearch/action/player/id/1807722776/code/cnbcplayershare
Or the internet.
Just think, if there were television back in 2002, we might never have invaded Iraq.
——————————————–
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
So he doesn't watch any news at all. Still he's frightened by what he "gathers". And based solely on his gatherings, he turns to fear-mongering.
And yet I have good friends & relatives that swear by the NYT and read it cover to cover every single day, allowing it to shape their reality. And others that watch a 1/2 hour of MSM each evening to get their news. In fact, most of my family/friends have neither the time nor inclination to double-check their news information or to look for alternate voices.
It scares me a lot.
Well Paul, only a few kooks were openly opposed to the Iraq war in early 2003. Anti-war sentiment only became newsworthy when Democrats found it politically expedient to withdraw their support. Or was it that their initial support was politically expedient and they simply reverted to their true selves? No…I'll go with the first reason as we see that anti-war sentiment has again contracted to approximate 2003 levels now that a Dem is in the White House.
In any case…this is just Krugman being snooty. "Oh, I don't watch TV news. Horrors! I read the NYT at home and listen to NPR in my car."
Then again, if it weren't for the few conservative blogs I read I'd probably never come across anything written by Krugman. So I suppose I know a bit of where he's coming from.
And as for FOX portraying the protests as crass and thigish, I thought the protesters did a fine job on their own as seen by that new news team of Meade and Althouse.
Aaah, I meant "thugish", of course.
[Bad fingers! Bad!]
Do you think Krugman actually believes the networks didn't cover the pro-Saddam marches?
Paul Krugman said, "But I gather …"
Paul, when you leave that cave to go hunting and gathering, … I'd stick to the hunting because you don't seem to gather too well. Of course, I can't really picture you hunting, either.
"I don't know, not having watched any tv and not having all the facts, I think it's fair to say the networks acted stupidly."
All the news that's fit to stint.
I'm laughing so hard because PK is paid a bunch of money to make things up, instead of reporting facts, by – wait for it – a news organization. Wow, that's just got to be the best prank ever played on folks who think they're perusing a "news" publication but are reading comedic fiction instead. Those guys. That NYT bunch are just the funniest New Yorkers ever.
Paul Krugman can read? I don't believe it.
So he doesn't know the facts, yet feels compelled to comment anyway. Why are we down on him for this? He's just following the example of his Messiah.
Krugman is low-hanging fruit always ripe for the picking. It's almost not fair.
Hey Bill, if you want to diss Krugman for not having his facts right, you need to have your own facts right. Krugman's post was referring to the lack of news coverage of the over 100,000 people who turned out in 18 degree weather on SATURDAY FEB. 26th. Each of your video examples of news coverage had to do with the protests on the weekend of Feb. 19 and 20.
Rather than showing Krugman to be petty and ill-informed, I think your little piss-fit shows the opposite. I don't know for sure that the national media over-looked the Saturday (Feb 26) protest, but I can say I didn't see it on when I checked in on the news late on Saturday, nor did the massive turnout get any notice on the morning news shows I saw Sunday; nor did I see anything in a scan of the Monday news. In Wisconsin this is a big deal.
Imagine how many other situations Krugman's lead-in can be generalized to:
"I don’t know anything about the subject, but I gather that …"
He doesn't know, but he feels …