A lot of people call journalism the first draft of history, unfortunately those first drafts are rarely changed and the public is left with inaccurate version of history. And the media is loathe to criticize itself on a real time basis.
So four years after the end of Bill Clinton's presidency, and after years of right wing inspired attacks, Time magazine (subscription required) finally came around to reviewing the media's coverage of President Bill Clinton and Special Persecutor Kenneth Starr.
"In retrospect, it is clear that there was no substance to the Whitewater allegations and the other White House scandalettes—the travel-office firings, the FBI files, the death of Vince Foster—except, of course, Lewinsky. It seems clear that Starr conducted an unseemly and irresponsible investigation filled with "abuses of power," as Clinton contends, illegal leaks to the press and barely legal coercive tactics against prospective witnesses. And it also seems clear that the press was way too credulous about Starr's allegations and didn't pay nearly enough attention to his methods."
As Emily Litella would have said, "Oh. That's very different. Never Mind."
While Time Magazine may have finally admitted what went on, it's difficult to imagine that the Washington Post's Susan Schmidt or the New York Times' Jeff Gerth (or the Wall Street Journal's Robert Bartely from the grave) will apologize for its biased coverage.
The next question is when will the press apologize for it's biased War on Gore coverage of the 2000 Presidential election. It is truly amazing that right wingers complain about the media when the MAIN reason George Bush is in the White House today is the biased coverage Gore received in 2000.
No comments:
Post a Comment