Friday
(0)[W]hen we read our newspapers or turn on our TV screens, what we see and hear might well have been "researched" by searching for dirt on the internet. Of course, the mainstream media will never admit it; the pretence that they are above such things is too important to them. They rely on the impression that their reporters are out in the field, fearlessly digging for details on the major issues of the day, not sat in an air-conditioned office with a cup of coffee and an open Google window. But it's the truth, and for the sake of their own reputations, it might now be time for them to start admitting that they read the blogs just like the rest of us.
- Rob Knight writing at Liberal Review about blog and media reportage of recent Lib Dem scandals
This is the news cycle in the US on stories that media suppresses because it is bad news for the left:
1. A blogger will write about a story and usually he is an expert in the topic.
2. Other bloggers will comment on it and expand the story.
3. A small newspaper reporter who obviously reads blogs will write a piece on the story.
4. Drudge headlines the story linking to the small newspaper.
5. If the story appears on Drudge, the media can no longer suppress the story and they have to cover it.
Posted by Jake at January 27, 2006 05:22 PM
Don't you think "suppress" is perhaps a tad melodramatic, not to say paranoid?
EG
Posted by Euan Gray at January 28, 2006 05:33 PM
No, it's not. If it does not fit the MSM worldview, they would Rather not talk about it. So it is ignored, or buried in a small blurb on page A24.
Posted by Eric E. Coe at January 29, 2006 05:38 PM
That's not suppression, though, is it? It's just deciding not to report something, or to report it only subtly.
EG
Posted by Euan Gray at January 29, 2006 09:04 PM
