MetaFilter posts tagged with WaPo and media

ABC's

PrinceValium — Tue, 11 Mar 2003 07:00:21 -0800

ABC's blog "The Note" suspends operations, citing lack of resources needed for war coverage, the blog's humorous style not being "the right national tonic," and this shocker: "We suspect that the amount of strictly political news — the kind of stuff that is the meat and starch of The Note — is likely to dramatically decrease in the coming days." GUH? Aren't blogs now more important than ever? Aren't politics now more important than ever? What message is being sent by the mainstream media here? (Via the indispensable Lloyd Grove of the Washington Post.)

nofundy — Mon, 19 Aug 2002 06:08:47 -0800

The Washington Post follows an agenda. There truly exists a bias in the press and here's an example. Metatalk had a thread on there being so many NYT links, perhaps this helps explain why. Many many more examples of the Post's biases can be found at SpinSanity and other such sites but this one comes from "next door" in Baltimore.
!Only MetaFilter is trustworthy!

( P.S. Looking for an example of "liberal bias?" This isn't it.)

PrinceValium — Wed, 05 Jun 2002 06:54:55 -0800

Notice something missing from today's Washington Post? In a creative protest of management's latest contract offer, Post union members withhold bylines from news stories and columns in the June 5 edition. Most articles are written "By A Washington Post Staff Writer" and pictures are taken "By A Washington Post Staff Photographer." What other unique forms of labor protest have you seen where the union gets its point across without striking or compromising the quality of the product?

claxton6 — Mon, 14 May 2001 08:34:28 -0800

A Society of Aliterates? Confused article in the Washington Post Style section indicts an aliterate society (one where people can read, but choose not to) for selling its soul at the going rate of 1 pic = 1000 words. Conflating "printed material" with "reading" and then with "quality", the author completely ignores what information people actually take away from different media (eg, doesn't notice that "reading" may be crappy s-f [hey, I had to give romance novels a break], while tv can be Frontline or 60 Minutes). Further, they throw in a brief screed against multimedia including highway signs. Bizarre and hypocritical, or maybe just illustrative, in that the writer completely forgoes logic and goes for scare tactics like:

You can walk through whole neighborhoods of houses in the country that do not contain books or magazines

in addition to the old stand-by of ignoring any real historical trend in reading. I want to say it's just some old crank, but can't quite, because the article was passed along by a friend earnestly worried about our aliterate society.