TV News: We Don't Care

Read Glenn Greenwald on Brian Williams' stunningly unresponsive "response" to the NYT's revelation that the coterie of ex-officers used by TV news to comment on military affairs was riddled with conflicts of interest and being used as a Pentagon propaganda arm. I'm not sure what's more stunning, that Williams can't be bothered to correctly state the nature of the complaint, or that his response is actually more than we've heard from any other network.

Apparently, nobody's even slightly embarrassed by any of this. And on some level, why should they be? Since as best I can tell all the networks are complicit, as long as they all agree to just hum along nobody should lose any market share to anyone else.

Comments

Brian Williams, like Chris Wallace, is a second generation disgrace to the integrity of the journalists they're following.

Sure, they look the part. Perfectly parted hair, Waspy entitlement smugness, nice ties, etc.

But their content is for shit.

Which isn't surprising in a surface-over-substance culture.

Posted by WinSmith | May 1, 2008 12:23 PM

Brian Williams works for a major military contractor. He wasn't hired to objectively report the news; his job is to act as an acceptable mouthpiece of the powers-that-be.

Posted by strasmangelo jones | May 1, 2008 12:25 PM

Four words: Jack Welch General Electric

Posted by Andruw | May 1, 2008 12:27 PM

Brian Williams has always struck me as the ultimate embodiment of William Hurt's character in Broadcast News. Well, maybe with a little less self-awareness -- at least Hurt's character had the sense to appear faux-apologetic for not knowing anything about anything.

Posted by Royko | May 1, 2008 12:29 PM

You're just never going to get the mainstream media to criticize the mainstream media. As Somerby says, they disappear their own conduct.

Posted by bobbo | May 1, 2008 12:30 PM

Does anybody actually watch TV news to find out what's going on in the world, or just because there's nothing else on?

Posted by TH | May 1, 2008 12:37 PM

"Brian Williams has always struck me as the ultimate embodiment of William Hurt's character in Broadcast News."

Sadly, that's not the case. If you were to talk to him, I'm sure you'd find Williams stunningly well-informed about most things with the capacity to become even more knowledgeable. The problem is he lives in a world where the cultural, psychological and emotional environment discourages him from applying his knowledge to the issues and encourages him to avoid thinking them.

Take a look at the whole area of tax policy. People like Williams and Charles Gibson are smart enough and have more than enough information at their disposal to know when they're being fed a line of BS on capital gains or supply-side theory. But they're biased against seriously thinking about tax policy, primarily because they're extremely wealthy yet are totally committed to the self-image of NOT being extremely wealthy.

Mike

Posted by MBunge | May 1, 2008 12:43 PM

Williams is getting hammered in the comments. I mean really, how do you become executive editor of NBC's nightly news and not even acknowledge the concept of disclosure.

He hides behind the generals instead of give any sort of answer.

Posted by Bullsmith | May 1, 2008 12:45 PM

The Death of Shame has hurt us almost as much as The Death of God. Williams isn't simply unapologetic: he'd find an apology to be a sign of weakness.

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | May 1, 2008 12:55 PM

Brian Williams is a conservative and a neocon, folks. It's not just a "media culture" thing. It is a personal ideology thing. He is Bush's favorite newsman. Read his blog...it's all right there. He's a Republican.

Posted by owenz | May 1, 2008 12:58 PM

It was a nothing story, a typical NYTimes hit story so completely lacking in substance that you really have to be in the fever swamps to think that anybody anywhere did anything wrong. The idea that any of these people had "conflicts of interest" is asinine - the ex-Generals had no more of a conflict of interest than a lawyer who takes death penalty cases has in commenting on TV about the death penalty, or a scientist who takes grants to study global warming has in commenting on global warming stories.

What so upsets people like Matthew and the Times is that these Generals were telling the truth, rather than the fantasy world that Matthew and the Times are living in.

Posted by Al | May 1, 2008 1:03 PM

AL,

Even for you this is an absurd leevl of hackery.

When a defense lawyer goes on TV you know that he is a defense lawyer and if he comments on a case he is involved in it is disclosed who he is.

The issue with these retired generals is they were being presented as independant but still working for the pentagon and spouting the party line.

Posted by Eric k | May 1, 2008 1:32 PM

I'd never believed people who claimed Al is a rotating team of paid trolls. But now I'm not so sure. "He" certainly does have days when he lies in a smooth, sophisticated manner, and then days (like today) when he's so stupid he seems as though he's just been hit in the head with a tire iron.

Posted by 23456 | May 1, 2008 1:33 PM

since most of the ex-military officers were getting privileged info from the pentagon which helped them in their day jobs as long as they went on TV and did a good job of presenting the pentagon talking points, I'd say the article raised serious issues.

Posted by dj spellchecka | May 1, 2008 1:37 PM

owenz:
Bingo!! Williams is even a self professed Dittohead!!

Posted by Joe Klein's conscience | May 1, 2008 2:06 PM

What a shock, career military officers sympathetic to a military point of view!

Now, if the NYTimes did an article about Jewish people with long ties to the Left that pose as independent commentators, TV producers&writers, the so-called dispassionate Jewish voices of academia, Hollywood all-American "moguls&players", or even about the pose that the newspapers and media outlets such Jews own (like the NYTimes, WP, US New & World Report, Reuters were "independent voices" - then we'd have a real story!

The Jews in the media couldn't bring themselves to report on that! Not the Meyers, Geffens, Sultzbergers.
Heck, the Jews running most of the MSM couldn't even bear to report that the ex-Trotskyites that became neocons were for the most part Straussian Jews of the Left, gone bad!

Posted by chris ford | May 1, 2008 3:29 PM

chris ford writes: "Heck, the Jews running most of the MSM couldn't even bear to report that the ex-Trotskyites that became neocons were for the most part Straussian Jews of the Left, gone bad!"

i find this funny. various neocons have tried repeatedly to paint any of their critics as anti-semitic. the new york times knows what would happen to them.

Posted by dj spellchecka | May 1, 2008 3:42 PM

Wow, we have Nazi trolls now too?

Posted by bobbo | May 1, 2008 3:42 PM

Chris Ford has been a Nazi troll since I was knee-high to a grass stalk.

One of the commenters-- I think he was from Mother Jones-- was on Dan Abrams last night and tried to get him to address the issue. He said he'd 'done some research' on it and quickly changed the subject back to Rev. Wright.

Posted by Persia | May 1, 2008 4:38 PM

NBC's failure to disclose that Gen. McCaffrey was on the board of the Raytheon defense contractors is a serious and complete failure of journalistic responsibility.

They were providing a bullhorn for propaganda.

Posted by Garuda | May 1, 2008 5:03 PM

"Sure, they look the part. Perfectly parted hair, Waspy entitlement smugness, nice ties, etc."

Chris Wallace is no WASP. He's ethnically Jewish, although judging by his first name he has converted to Christianity. He also has a face for radio.

Posted by Fred | May 1, 2008 6:30 PM

Ford: "Heck, the Jews running most of the MSM couldn't even bear to report that the ex-Trotskyites that became neocons were for the most part Straussian Jews of the Left, gone bad!"

Chris actually gets this right, at least as far as various neocons being both ex-Trotskyites and followers of Leo Strauss.

What he gets wrong, of course, is that any of these assholes can be considered "left" any more, if they ever could be. A lot of "leftists" probably didn't like Trotsky any more than they liked Stalin. Not being a "leftist" myself, I couldn't say for sure.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | May 2, 2008 12:57 AM

The very idea that we should have retired generals commenting on military matters instead of peace activists, or maybe movie stars! The horror!

This level of stupidity is beyond parody.

Posted by Robert Powell | May 2, 2008 4:46 AM

forgot to add, regardless of whether or not the comments here think the ny times story is a nothing-burger, the military took it seriously and have suspended the program it describes.

Posted by dj spellchecka | May 2, 2008 2:18 PM