“What I think this series will demonstrate is what I knew from the beginning: PBS cannot be balanced on issues central to the ideological battles of our day. The folks at Frontline are full of talented people, and they really intended to be fair, but the institutional gravities of public broadcasting pull so overwhelmingly to the left and the way left that the results are guaranteed to be disfigured.”
“I watched the “chapters” of part 1 of the series that address the Plame investigation. The series’ account of Plamegate is incredibly disappointing. It begins with the alleged falsity of “the sixteen words” in President Bush’s 2003 State of the Union address, continues with Joseph Wilson’s alleged effort to expose their falsity and with the administration’s purported effort to “punish” Wilson by “outing” his wife. Interviews with Wilson and with Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus, among others, convey the received account of Plamegate.
Nowhere is there any discussion of the accuracy of “the sixteen words,” of the falsity of Wilson’s account of his trip to Niger, or of the Senate Intelligence Committee report finding Wilson’s account to be a hodgepodge of lies. See, for example, our own “Joseph Wilson, liar” and Steve Hayes’s “The Incredibles.” Based on part 1’s account of Plamegate, it is impossible to consider the possibility — a possibility that I believe to be the case — that rather than “punishing” Valerie Plame by “outing” her, the administration was attempting to fight back against a cynical campaign attacking its credibility that was based on an elaborate set of falsehoods.
In short, the series’ account of the Plame investigation is itself an installment of “the news war” that the series purports to chronicle.”
I love watching the old media die, it is one of my favorite sports…..for us long time conservatives it is WAY PAST TIME….
Jenny Hatch
Funniest story of the day at Althouse:
Eric Alterman thinks there should be a “blogging council” to condemn bloggers who go wrong.
