Journolist Will Be Shut Down

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

Journalists or even Journolists should never ***** about private things becoming public. Never.
 
Isn't that the message board where smug self-important beltway reporters worked to develop the common wisdom of the day? Big loss.
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
Interview with Dave Weigel (who's leaked emails caused Journolist to be shut down):

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDY5NDY0YzRlZTJmODYzMmFlMDU2NjE0MTkxMzgwYWM=

And, sportsguydave's favorite media personality offers $100,000 to anyone who will leak him the entire Journolist archive:

http://bigjournalism.com/abreitbart/2010/06/29/reward-100000-for-full-journolist-archive-source-fully-protected/?preview=true&preview_id=86962&preview_nonce=ec524375b1
 
Inky_Wretch said:
You have to be a real scumbag to sell that to Breitbart, a journalistic leech who celebrates the demise of traditional media while using it to build his "empire."

So, do you think someone will do it?

$100,000 is a lot of money. I'll bet it's a whole lot of money to some of the people on the list.

And there's the whole, "someone else will do it if I don't" argument.

Now, I'm not sure how it worked. Would any long term member who saved his emails have an entire archive to sell?

I thought that part of the reason that it was shut down was so that it wouldn't be able to be searched through.

Although I suppose that whoever leaked the info to the Daily Caller has the whole archive because they clearly searched though it to find Weigel's posts to it.
 
Piotr

check your thread title

Didn't you mean to write

"Journolist Will Be Shot Down" and and "Shut Down"
 
It was the moment of greatest peril for then-Sen. Barack Obama’s political career. In the heat of the presidential campaign, videos surfaced of Obama’s pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, angrily denouncing whites, the U.S. government and America itself. Obama had once bragged of his closeness to Wright. Now the black nationalist preacher’s rhetoric was threatening to torpedo Obama’s campaign.

The crisis reached a howling pitch in mid-April, 2008, at an ABC News debate moderated by Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos. Gibson asked Obama why it had taken him so long – nearly a year since Wright’s remarks became public – to dissociate himself from them. Stephanopoulos asked, “Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?”

Watching this all at home were members of Journolist, a listserv comprised of several hundred liberal journalists, as well as like-minded professors and activists. The tough questioning from the ABC anchors left many of them outraged. “George [Stephanopoulos],” fumed Richard Kim of the Nation, is “being a disgusting little rat snake.”

Others went further. According to records obtained by The Daily Caller, at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to protect their favored candidate. Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage.

In one instance, Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, “Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.”

Michael Tomasky, a writer for the Guardian, also tried to rally his fellow members of Journolist: “Listen folks–in my opinion, we all have to do what we can to kill ABC and this idiocy in whatever venues we have. This isn’t about defending Obama. This is about how the [mainstream media] kills any chance of discourse that actually serves the people.”

“Richard Kim got this right above: ‘a horrible glimpse of general election press strategy.’ He’s dead on,” Tomasky continued. “We need to throw chairs now, try as hard as we can to get the call next time. Otherwise the questions in October will be exactly like this. This is just a disease.”

http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/20/documents-show-media-plotting-to-kill-stories-about-rev-jeremiah-wright/#ixzz0uFglcczj
 
A question about the "JournoList," is all the accounted for members opinion/commentary types or are they actual supposed objective journalists?
 
Looks like mainly opinion folks:



http://mediamatters.org/blog/201007200006

Breaking! Liberal journalists talked to each other before signing an open letter criticizing a terrible debate!!

July 20, 2010 8:45 am ET by Julie Millican

Another day, another right-wing media freak out. Today, the right is in a tizzy over a Daily Caller exclusive scoop that "documents show media plotting to kill stories about Rev. Jeremiah Wright." Except, of course, their "documents" show no such thing.

The Daily Caller purports to have obtained copies of emails from the "Journolist" listserv, which they report is "comprised of several hundred liberal journalists, as well as like-minded professors and activists." Their big, breaking story exposes that some liberal journalists and a professor were outraged by an April 2008 Democratic Presidential primary debate -- a debate that was widely criticized as being "specious and gossipy." As you may recall, during that debate Obama was asked questions such as, "Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?"; "How do you convince Democrats" that not wearing an American flag lapel pin "would not be a vulnerability?"; and "Can you explain" your "relationship" with Bill Ayers, a question that was literally suggested to moderator George Stephanopoulos by right-wing radio hosts.

The debate was, in a word, ridiculous. And numerous media figures agreed. The Daily Caller highlights portions of the purported Journolist emails which showed several participants discussing how best to frame and word an open letter to ABC News condemning the debate. Each of the media figures mentioned in the Daily Caller report was an opinion columnist or a blogger. Hardly the stuff of a mainstream media conspiracy, though the Caller desperately tried to paint it as such. They specifically said that journalists from Time and Politico were involved in the discussion, but the article provides absolutely no evidence to back this up.

So, yes, it appears that the big scandal is that liberal journalists and professors talked to each other about how to frame a publically released letter to ABC News. Stop the presses!

Expanding on the stupidity of the Daily Caller report is the fact that many of these same journalists were
very clear and very open about their displeasure with the ABC news debate at the time.
 
More read meat from those liberals on JournoList, as they tear apart ... Keith Olbermann?

http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/23/journolisters-offended-by-keith-olbermanns-%E2%80%98misogynistic%E2%80%99-%E2%80%98predictable%E2%80%99-and-%E2%80%98pompous%E2%80%99-show/

Conservatives are shocked that "journalists" don't like Olbermann.
 
Glad to see that smarmy little punk Tucker Carlson has slithered out of the ooze again. Unfortunately for him, most folks' lasting memory of him will be Jon Stewart calling him a **** the night Crossfire jumped the shark.
 
Good thing conservative "journalists" would never stoop to partisanship.

Oh.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/scocca/archive/2010/07/23/how-will-tucker-carlson-explain-the-journolist-scandal-to-his-fellow-conservative-journalists.aspx


Tucker Carlson is shocked by such behavior. Tucker Carlson is a veteran, after all, of the Weekly Standard. How do the professionals at the Weekly Standard approach the political process, in their role as detached journalists?

On June 18, 2007, the first group disembarked in Juneau from the Holland America Line’s M.S. Oosterdam, and went to the governor’s mansion, a white wooden Colonial house with six two-story columns, for lunch. The contingent featured three of The Weekly Standard ’s top writers: William Kristol, the magazine’s Washington-based editor, who is also an Op-Ed columnist for the Times and a regular commentator on “Fox News Sunday”; Fred Barnes, the magazine’s executive editor and the co-host of “The Beltway Boys,” a political talk show on Fox News; and Michael Gerson, the former chief speechwriter for President Bush and a Washington Post columnist.

By the time the Weekly Standard pundits returned to the cruise ship, Paulette Simpson said, “they were very enamored of her.” In July, 2007, Barnes wrote the first major national article spotlighting Palin, titled “The Most Popular Governor,” for The Weekly Standard. Simpson said, “That first article was the result of having lunch.” Bitney agreed: “I don’t think she realized the significance until after it was all over. It got the ball rolling.”

The other journalists who met Palin offered similarly effusive praise: Michael Gerson called her “a mix between Annie Oakley and Joan of Arc.” The most ardent promoter, however, was Kristol, and his enthusiasm became the talk of Alaska’s political circles. According to Simpson, Senator Stevens told her that “Kristol was really pushing Palin” in Washington before McCain picked her. Indeed, as early as June 29th, two months before McCain chose her, Kristol predicted on “Fox News Sunday” that “McCain’s going to put Sarah Palin, the governor of Alaska, on the ticket.” He described her as “fantastic,” saying that she could go one-on-one against Obama in basketball, and possibly siphon off Hillary Clinton’s supporters. He pointed out that she was a “mother of five” and a reformer. “Go for the gold here with Sarah Palin,” he said.









 
For years, I have cared about -- and tried to explain to friends -- how if there was a vast liberal media conspiracy, I never saw it in my 18 years of news meetings or whatever. How a lot of reporters and editors are liberal, but the corporations that put out the paper often aren't. And I admit I still gnash my teeth when Rush Limbaugh refers to it as the "state-run media," and "mainstream media" is said with the same tone as somebody might say "the Nazi party."

So I have cared about that, but increasingly I don't for the simple and sad reason that Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Levin and friends have convinced a lot of people that this conspiracy exists and that horse is far, far out of the barn (this isn't new, of course, it's simply a matter of degree based on the proliferation of conservative talk radio, television and the blogosphere). Things like the comments on this Journolist don't help; they'll be considered "proof" of this conspiracy, not some people kibitzing back and forth.

So at this point, there's no convincing many people otherwise -- Rush and Sean said it, so it must be so -- and there never will be, and we in the business just have to live with it.
 
SF_Express said:
For years, I have cared about -- and tried to explain to friends -- how if there was a vast liberal media conspiracy, I never saw it in my 18 years of news meetings or whatever. How a lot of reporters and editors are liberal, but the corporations that put out the paper often aren't. And I admit I still gnash my teeth when Rush Limbaugh refers to it as the "state-run media," and "mainstream media" is said with the same tone as somebody might say "the Nazi party."

So I have cared about that, but increasingly I don't for the simple and sad reason that Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Levin and friends have convinced a lot of people that this conspiracy exists and that horse is far, far out of the barn (this isn't new, of course, it's simply a matter of degree based on the proliferation of conservative talk radio, television and the blogosphere). Things like the comments on this Journolist don't help; they'll be considered "proof" of this conspiracy, not some people kibitzing back and forth.

So at this point, there's no convincing many people otherwise -- Rush and Sean said it, so it must be so -- and there never will be, and we in the business just have to live with it.

Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, his little buddy Levin and the rest of their motley crew are boobs leading boobs. They offer their listeners simplistic solutions, so they don't have to be bothered with the intellectual challenge of thinking for themselves,. They exist in a nice little hermetically sealed echo chamber where they all fellate each other constantly and dissenting views aren't allowed.

The whole "liberal media" thing has kind of lost its steam over the years...kind of like "political correctness," which some have watered down by applying it to everything they don't agree with. Just let these folks have their canard, and move on.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top