MSM Rules

I forgot to mention one thing about the changeover to The Atlantic, namely that since this blog is now an MSM property it's going to be operating under what I like to think of as MSM rules. In particular, in the future I resolve that:

• If a Democrat does something substantively meritorious but politically risky, I'll focus on the political risks.
• If a Democrats does something substantively questionable, but politically beneficial, I'll slam him as an opportunist.
• If a Democrat does something politically smart and substantively correct, I'll ignore it.

Just something to keep in mind.

Comments

#4 you forgot: If a Democrat does or says something cowardly and obsequious, you'll commend them for their collegiality, spirit of bipartisanship, and sense of fair play.

Posted by elle loco | May 1, 2007 9:10 AM

Also- if a Republican does something substatively questionable and politically risky, you'll call him a maverick.

Posted by SP | May 1, 2007 9:42 AM

There's so much more to being a real MSMer than this. You need to develop the full list.

For one, you'll need to start ignoring the Israeli-lobby affiliations of individuals or publications commenting on the Middle East.

And publishing the odd photo of missing white females would not hurt.

Posted by otto | May 1, 2007 10:11 AM

Can we have a thread to vent about the inadequacies of the new blogging system? A few little improvements would go a long way.

Posted by otto | May 1, 2007 10:19 AM

Don't forget to express your concerns about how Bill Clinton's behavior will influence THE CHILDREN.

Posted by LaFollette Progressive | May 1, 2007 10:32 AM

RE:
otto:

Can we have a thread to vent about the inadequacies of the new blogging system? A few little improvements would go a long way.

Posted by otto

Otto,

Why not this one?

1: Comment Header (Poster Name) needs to go. Importance - Ludicrously important

2: Return of Recent Comments
Importance - Very High

3: Improvements to RSS feeds
a. Categories
b. Comments
b.1. Implement intelligent Comment Feeds (subscribe to specific threads, etc.)
Importance: Not necessary, but very niice.

Posted by theCoach | May 1, 2007 1:16 PM

Brilliant

Posted by Crust | May 1, 2007 1:19 PM

I hope that either A) you're kidding and everyone knows it, or B) the Atlantic editors don't actually read your blog...

Posted by Mr. Noah | May 1, 2007 1:59 PM

What, nothing about the hair styling habits of Democratic candidates for President?

That's it, I'm out of here.

Posted by Lame Man | May 1, 2007 3:36 PM

That's a good list to start with, theCoach.

Posted by otto | May 1, 2007 5:30 PM

Youre so far detached from reality that you probably think youre slim. You must know deep down in that bloated gut of yours that you are full of shit.

Posted by pimp hand strikes! | May 1, 2007 5:47 PM

I presume that you meant to say that you would slam him OR HER...

Posted by p curtis | May 1, 2007 6:46 PM

That's great that Andrew Sullivan linked to this post. As much as I generally enjoy reading his blog, he practically invented Rule #3. Except I'm pretty sure he thinks Obama's hot.

Posted by hmm | May 1, 2007 8:19 PM

Here is one: No matter how callous or stupid they act, I will always praise or excuse the republicans.

Posted by vwcat | May 1, 2007 8:24 PM

LMAO. Made my day!

Posted by scott | May 1, 2007 9:02 PM

You can't be serious...

Posted by John McEnrow | May 1, 2007 9:45 PM

And don't forget - - in time of war, chit chat with Chris Matthews about the size of the president's codpiece.

Posted by Barry in MIA | May 1, 2007 10:17 PM

Uhhh, April 1 was last month.

The press gives the Dems as many, if not more, passes than it does the GOP.

Here's a real MSM rule for you: unless you're a [D] or an [R], you're not really a politician. In fact, you don't even really exist.

Posted by John | May 1, 2007 11:00 PM

What is MSM? "Men who have sex with men"?

Posted by John | May 1, 2007 11:39 PM

and if harry reid continues his rapid descent into insanity, trust me, i won't say a word.

Posted by lucretius | May 1, 2007 11:44 PM

This blog could use a little design help. Compared to other Atlantic blogs, it's kind of, um, plain. Also, the text size is not proportional. Coming from his blog, I had to change the text size to make it readable here.

Posted by THS | May 2, 2007 12:24 AM

Also, remember to devote several hours of coverage each day to the poor, downtrodden, defenseless Duke Lacrosse players as if it were the gravest miscarriage of justice since Dr. Sam Sheppard.

Posted by Dave | May 2, 2007 12:38 AM

Please add to your MSM rules my particular pet peeves.

1. I will no longer comment on the value or consequences of specific policy proposals, instead focusing on how the proposal plays politically.

2. If my research (not that I will do any) demonstrates that policy x will cost $10 million, I will not report that. Instead I will say Mr. GOP says it will cost $100 million and Mr. DFL says it will cost $10 million and let my readers figure out who is telling the truth.

Posted by Kija | May 2, 2007 1:45 AM

That's an important MSM rule, Kija. Given your example, while the real cost of the proposal is 10 million, this "getting both sides of the story" rule means that the average reader will come away thinking that the true cost is likely to be about 55 million or so.

Posted by mrjauk | May 2, 2007 3:17 AM

"getting both sides" is covering a crook like Duke Cunningham and how disgraceful he is while a fine upstanding Diane Feinstein is just feeding her family with money from a war she vehemently protests.

Posted by jb | May 2, 2007 11:18 AM

recommendations gambling online

Posted by gambling recommendations online | May 12, 2007 6:08 PM