Who knew that the media would take so well to the lesson served up by our Educator-In-Chief:

“There’s an old saying in Tennessee – I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee – that says, fool me once, shame on – shame on you. Fool me – you can’t get fooled again.” GWB, September 17, 2002.

It appears that some factions of the press do not intend to get fooled again. Take for instance, this headline and excerpt from the Los Angeles Times:

Scant evidence found of Iran-Iraq arms link
“Before invading Iraq, the administration warned repeatedly that Saddam Hussein was developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. Those statements proved wrong. The administration’s charges about Iran sound uncomfortably familiar to some.”

Those to whom the charges sound uncomfortably familiar are people with measurable brainwave activity. It’s nice to see that some in the press are in that category. Given the degree to which much of the press swallowed administration lies in the ramp up to the Iraq war, it is encouraging to see some evidence of professional skepticism on the part of the Times. There was plenty of reason to be skeptical the first time around, but that didn’t stop most major news outlets from ignoring the danger signs and publishing the administration’s propaganda.

Having been burned, it seems that, at least in this case, they aren’t going to roll over again. As BushCo manuevers to justify yet another unwarranted attack, this time against Iran, the newly discovered journalistic gumption of the Times produces this observation:

“U. S. officials have declined to provide documantation of seized Iranian ordnance, despite repeated requests. The U. S. military often releases photographs of other weapons finds.”

By reporting that documentation was requested and denied, and contrasting that with previous known behavior, the authors have dutifully informed their readers with sufficient and appropriate data from which informed conclusions can be made. That’s how it’s supposed to work. And it should work that way regardless of who’s in office, whether or not they are popular, or what effect it might have on the reporters or their employers. If enough of the media provides this kind of critical review of government PR, we might just avoid another deadly and pointless war.

These are the times that define the media. Will they fulfill their obligation to the people they serve? Will they honor the journalistic principles that are the foundation of open and free democracies?

We’ll see.

Little now tells the New Yorker that he is, “basically a Republican.” His career, however, is on fire. The article discloses that he next appears at the Soboba Casino, in San Jacinto, California, and then at the North Iowa Community Auditorium. Even so, he still has strong opinions about his comic colleagues:

“Little said that he does not find [Bill] Maher and his ilk terribly funny. When asked to name a young comedian he admired, he responded, “Robin Williams.” [Williams is 55 years old]

And when asked if he has a funny joke about Iraq, he slipped into his W impression and said…

“George W. Bush here. I tell you, I’m between I-raq and a hard place.”

Boy, with material like, these will be the hottest tickets in Washington.

Now it may seem like I’m making too much of this. After all it is just a social gathering for the DC media crowd; an opportunity to mingle with celebrities and one another. But when you think of the pressure that must have been brought to bear in order to make such a drastic change in direction, it reveals something about these folks.

Whether the pressure came from the White House or the WHCA members, the bottom line is this: None of these people can take a joke. The cliche about comedy, that it is funny because it’s true, is, like most cliches, rooted in reality. Truth is something that is in scarce supply in Washington. The White House isn’t dispensing much of it, and the press, too often, doesn’t go looking for it. They seem, sometimes, to be running from it. And as they run from the honesty of Colbert, they slam face first into a wall of truthiness. Ironic, isn’t it?

The fact that they cannot laugh at themselves when a mirror is held up to them just further confirms their aversion to the truth. So they settle for a safe, toothless, has-been Republican clown to provide entertainment that they know will not get stuck in their bridge-work. And that’s the perfect analogy for a press corpse that feeds the rest of us that same Truthiness Brand© of pablum.

Dennis Kucinich made a surprise appearance at the National Conference for Media Reform. Before the crowd of 3,000, he announced that there is going to be a new Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the House Government Reform Committee, and that he would be the chairman. The subcommittee will oversee several government agencies, including the FCC.

Kucinich intends to address a variety of concerns for today’s media, including ownership caps, consolidation, network neutrality, and the fairness doctrine. He told the conference:

“The media reform movement is opening up holding the media to a higher standard of accountability […] The urgency of media reform has never been more obvious. The media has become a servant very narrow corporate interests.”

I hope that he forces the other Democratic presidential candidates to take these issues seriously.

The state of journalism has a pair of stories this week on recent hires that deliver a little good news a Little not so good.

Journalism on public television has taken a turn for the better with the announcement that Bill Moyers will return to PBS with a weekly show called, ”Bill Moyers Journal.” It’s especially gratifying to learn of Moyers return the same week we learned of Kenneth Tomlinson’s departure. Tomlinson was instrumental in Moyers leaving PBS two years ago. The first installment of the Journal, airing April 25, is titled, “Buying the War,” about the role of the press in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. I can’t think of a better subject for the premiere.

On the other hand, journalists have embarrassed themselves with their selection for the featured guest at this year’s White House Correspondents Association dinner. If you recall, last year’s guest was the eerily inspiring Stephen Colbert. So what have they come up with as a follow up? Rich Little. That’s right, the comfy, G-rated impersonator from the 70’s is apparently still available for Bar Mitvahs and press dinners. You think they’re over-compensating just a bit?

You might expect that the closing session of the National Conference for Media Reform would present rousing speakers that reaffirm the previous days experiences – the information, inspiration and connections – and act as a catalyst to provoke impassioned and sustained activism. That expectation was met. But one speaker, Van Jones, founder and executive Directer of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, delivered a unique insight that we would all be well served to contemplate.

After acknowledging the necessity for inclusion of minorities, women, youth, and every facet of our diverse culture in the media reform movement, he cited the excuses that Don Rumsfeld and his colleagues employed to explain our difficulties in Iraq. Rumsfeld had said that we were not prepared for our “catastrophic success.” While pointing out the Rumsfeld was, of course, lying, he turned the question back on us. The struggle to achieve our goals, whether they be media reform, health care, fair trade, environmental, whatever, consume such a great portion of our awareness, we may be neglecting to consider what we will do when we succeed.

That is not a triviality that we can address when we get there. There actually is some truth to the notion that America was not prepared to act productively after the fall of Baghdad. And there is also evidence that our new Democratic majority in congress was taken a little by surprise. As an example, many of the first comments from Democratic leaders were egregiously free of any mention of Iraq. And worse, some were asserting that they would support the President’s surge, …um escalation, …um augmentation. That was a symptom of not being prepared. But within days, after being forcefully reminded by the people that we wanted out of Iraq and that’s why we elected them, the leaders reversed course. We will have to be there to remind them often, I have no doubt.

Recognizing that victories can be hollow without confirmed action to sustain them, is something we must all be thinking about now.

For those of you who were not fortunate enough to attend the National Conference For Media Reform, I have compiled a few moments that may be of interest.

Jeff Cohen of Fairness and Accuracy in Media:After pointing out some disturbing stats that prove that broadcast media favors right wing pundits and commentators, he itemized his three goals for reform.

• Challenge the mainstream media to open up.
• Build independent and non-profit media.
• Structural reform of the Internet, promoting community access and preserving network neutrality.

Chellie Pingree of Common Cause:
Chellie made the fascinating observation that when Jimmy Carter was asked to observe elections in the U. S. as he has done throughout the world, he had to decline because the U. S. did not meet the criteria for such observation. Specifically, that elections be run by non-partisans and there be national standards. Neither of which is true here.

Amy Goodman of Democracy Now:
Amy told a disturbing story of the Covey Plantation. Covey was a slave “breaker”. That is precisely what it sounds like. Slaves that were resistant or troublesome were sent to Covey for training. One of those was Frederick Douglass. Douglass escaped and made his way north and the rest is history. Except this bit of history that is not widely reported – the Covey Plantation is now the home of … are you sitting down?… Don Rumsfeld!

Sen. Bernie Sanders (That felt good to type):
Bernie told us emphatically that, if you are concerned about foreign policy in Iraq; if you are concerned about health care; if you are concerned about the economy; if you are concerned about global warming; you are kidding yourselves if you are not concerned about corporate control of the media. And he reminded us that the media is just as responsible for the war in Iraq as Bush.

Norman Soloman of the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Norman made the astute observation that the New York Times will correct misstatements of fact, but not statements like, “The Bush adminstration is seeking democracy in Iraq,” although it is just as untrue.