Right Wing Entitlement Culture: Pt. II - The Media

UPDATE: Somehow I posted the unchecked, raw version of this post the other day without noticing it. So, in the spirit of showing you that I'm not a dithering buffoon who doesn't understand grammar, here's the version that should have been posted.

---------------------------------------------

In the second installment of our series on Right Wing Entitlement Culture, we examine the singular aspect of the modern American landscape that the Right claims is largely against them - The Media.

While the Modern American Right continually blast the "Mainstream Media", it's interesting to note that they also love to blather endlessly about how Fox"News" enjoys a massive audience share that other outlets should be jealous of.

Admittedly, I do watch Fox"News" now and again, but not for the reasons that they claim most people do. More on that aspect of the Right and the media in America in a moment.

I thought I would start this off with what is likely the perfect example of Right Wing Entitlement machinations: a healthy dose of rank conjecture, conspiracy, and more than a sprinkling of insistence of victimhood.



Immediately Breitbart goes after his most prestigious foe - Media Matters. Not because they are explicitly wrong by using context and the precise and accurately accounted words of the Modern American Right and their Fox"News" masters, but because he has a metaphorical hard-on to see Eric Boehlert and company be proven false by any means necessary.

This is the first, and most shining example, of conservative framing - attack the messenger without merit.

In terms of O'Reilly's insistence that he and Fox"News" have proven that Media Matters is a sham operation funded almost exclusively by George Soros, he again references the demonstrably misleading chart of Soros's financial contributions to Media Matters - something Breitbart and Fox"News" have tried to do with NPR as well.

This is where Breitbart - accompanied by an easily convinced O'Reilly - start to make completely false connections with Media Matters, Daily Kos, and Anthony Weiner's staffers that is the perfect definition of "unfounded". What O'Reilly postulates is that simply because people question Breitbart's motives and sources, they are simply trying to "smear" him.

Here is where they actually got it wrong, though their instincts were right from the start.

Andrew Breitbart has been so eager to prove that his socio-political opposites are nothing but corrupt and immoral that he will distribute and champion material that he apparently doesn't properly vet. And for those that used this template as a rational for going after the story and it's credibility, they were wrong - this time.

Breitbart then tries to explain his specious and laughably poor "connections" by referencing the non-controversial Journolist story as if it were in any way controversial. But, to a Conservative or Libertarian, any way to besmirch media that you don't control automatically demands that you label it as controversial.

The pair then went full-on Beckian to insist that MSNBC, Media Matters, and the White House are in this together in order to attack Breitbart and Fox"News". Again, this is something that is not even provable or even in the realm of speculation. What Breitbart and O'Reilly are relying on is another piece of conservative framing - something that media outlets have decided to cover based on nothing more than the Right has said that it was true.

Certainly, Barack Obama has had meeting with bloggers and reporters that champion the Left, but he has be equally open to those on the Right. But, I suppose that O'Reilly and Breitbart think that since they have both not been invited to an exclusive "sit-down" with Obama that this means that there is some sinister plot to destroy them.

Immediately following, O'Reilly defends his network's easily probable track record - defending, championing, and even employing members of the Modern American Right - against attacks targeting them when Breitbart boasts it is simply "projection" by the Left. It's at this point in the "interview" that reality is completely turned on its head.

After Brietbart lambastes The Huffington Post for being a primary source for ensuring that conservative claims never see the light of day - something that simply doesn't happen - O'Reilly goes full on "you know they are going to try and kill you". And Breitbart is more than eager to embrace that meme. After all, conservative victimhood works to their advantage more often than most people are willing to admit.

With that said, I'm not going to state that people of any ideological stripe have not threatened Breitbart. But one has to question what those threats are and if they are real or just posturing. We have all seen where conservative rhetoric leads to.

So how does this "interview" express the very real aspect of Right Wing Entitlement Culture in relation to modern media?

Primarily, it demands that anyone within the Modern American Right never be accountable for their previous mistakes and favor a singular instance where they were correct. I'm reminded of the popular phrase that "a blind squirrel can find a nut every great once in a while".

Secondly, The Right demand on a daily basis that their framing be used as a primer for all media coverage. Unfortunately for those of Liberal/Progressive perspective, this is all too true - even though the opposition that makes these demands will never admit it. Just take a look at virtually all the Sunday Shows on all major networks and you will see this in action. The Modern American Right demand that all media push their narrative - regardless of its merit - again and again and again. This is where they get the term "Liberal Media Bias". If someone doesn't genuflect to their particular belief system then you are guilty of heresy of the highest order.

For classic examples of what Breitbart and O'Reilly are referencing, check here and here.

Let's get back to the notion that Fox"News" has such a large audience share because their "reporting" is accurate, yet they can't seem to embrace the idea that this would make them "mainstream".

I have stated many times that accurate reporting and ratings-share are mutually exclusive creatures and to state that one equals another is a complete fabrication. This equivocation is another form of Right Wing framing. If this were true, then it should cross over into all forms of communications to audiences: The film AVATAR would have been more factually accurate than The Hurt Locker, as more people saw the former at theatres than the later.

Also, employees of Fox"News" have also claimed that America is a nation that is "Center-Right", yet that flies in the face of the fact that a plurality oppose the views that Fox and their compatriots champion.

The job of the American Media is to report the events of the day. When those events are beginning to be largely shaped by Right Wing ideology - and the media doesn't accept that premise - those that are attempting to shape it consider themselves being attacked by those they are attempting to control. This is the very nature of Right Wing Entitlement culture in relation to media.

Essentially, they are spoiled children being told that they can't have all that they want all the time. The reality is that their socio-political opponents are not in control the way they are being presented as.

Progress Report

Much is being made about Obama's "self-evaluation" for his first year as President. From the more predictable tirades from the far-right calling this ego-driven blather to tebaggers equating this with Obama claiming that he can perform complex brain-surgery, I would honestly have to say I don't agree with any of it - including Obama's assertion that he gets a B+.



From my perspective, he gets a C. He's passing, but can do better.

Here's a list of things that I believe he needs to do in order to get that grade up.

1 - Veto any healthcare legislation that does not include a Public Option. While I am of the belief that this country would be better off under a Single Payer structure, a "robust" Public Option is light-years away better than what the Senate has done to reform up to today.

2 - He needs to answer his critics in a more direct fashion. When people like Dick and Liz Cheney essentially calling you a traitor, you should respond. If you've got people like the teabaggers railing that you weren't born in the US, you respond. The only problem is creating the illusion that these questions and concerns are far more valid than they are.

3 - Don't continually give ground to Republicans if they aren't willing to meet you half way. Far too often, Obama and his administration have given Republicans chance after chance with no common ground being met - only obstructionism and fear mongering from those same Republicans that clamour for "bi-partisanship".

4 - No secret deals with Wall-Street or big corporations. Sever all ties with them and the people will rally around you more than ever. This alleged deal with PhRMA and the White House has twisted healthcare reform into something almost unrecognizable. Get all administration officials with close relationships with Wall-Street out ( ie: Geithner and Paulson )

5 - Increase transparency. While it appears that a large portion of what has gone on since Jan 20th has been open to the public, there is a lot more that we need to see. Naturally, there are things that can't be due to security and classification issues, but I am speaking from a realistic standpoint. If it doesn't violate any previously established laws that prevent revealing info/documents to the public, be up front about it.

6 - Get out of Iraq and Afghanistan completely. The Bush administration pulled focus from the initial mission not only when Iraq was invaded by when he lost Bin Laden in Tora Bora. We don't need to be occupying either country any longer. The Focus should be on domestic security and finding key Al Queada in Pakistan with a reasoned time-table and goals for that. We are dangerously close to nation-building in Afghanistan and that is something that we don't need to be doing

These key points are what Obama can definitely improve on. As of right now he's lost enough ground that conservatives feel they've gained the upper hand, but there's time enough to correct the mistakes of this first year. Obama doesn't need to be a one-term President - his goals are noble and will benefit this country no matter what elements from the Right may think

Misleading The Letter Of The Law

As is to be expected, Fox"News" and various conservative blogs, message boards, and "news" sites are pushing the story of the White House gathering your "data" or your "info". And while the Presidential Records Act requires that all correspondance with the White House be archived, the way the story is being framed is that your "personal information" - not just your name and your comments that were posted - is somehow in danger.

The White House is collecting and storing comments and videos placed on its social-networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube without notifying or asking the consent of the site users, a failure that appears to run counter to President Obama's promise of a transparent government and his pledge to protect privacy on the Internet.

Marc Rotenberg, president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said the White House signaled that it would insist on open dealings with Internet users and, in fact, should feel obliged to disclose that it is collecting such information.

"The White House has not been adequately transparent, particularly on how it makes use of new social media techniques, such as this example," he said.

If one were to simply read the lead-in, you would come away with the impression that ALL of the social networking sites are being monitored even if there is no direct correspondance with the White House.

Even the Washington Times article explains this rather poorly. The average reader might not catch the word "its" in the opening paragraph which is the only signifier that it's not the entirity of Facebook or Twitter that is being archived, but the White House's personal sections. Trust me, your MySpace pic folder where you put your emo pics and videos of that drunk kid from the party last weekend, as well as your home address, phone and social security number, are safe.

And while the spectre of identity theft is real, it is these fears within people that conservatives are hoping to stoke to a boiling point. People should worry about their own use of personal information on social networking sites rather than respond to the fearmongering of conservatives.

God May Love You....

....but James Dobson thinks you suck.

Focus on the Family founder James Dobson scolded the White House for neglecting to send a representative to yesterday's National Day of Prayer event at the Capitol, but a source familiar with the situation said the Obama team didn't have much of a chance. That's because the event organizers stipulated that the White House representative had to be opposed to abortion rights, according to this source.

"The administration's representative had to be pro-life," says the source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "Nobody else was allowed to go."

Only one White House staff member got an invitation, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. He didn't attend. Good for him.

More from US News

God's Definition Of Love

The Westboro Baptist Church is a fascinating lot.

They encompass the most fringe stereotypes that the Right has of the Left, and vice-versa, and blends them together in seemless, choreographed, movements complete with picket-sign slogans.

You'll likely find them at many funerals for soldiers. But recently, they were at the White House shouting about Jack van Impe's favorite subject - The Anti-Christ and the end of the world.

Various videos can be found at Campus Progress, but this one stood out:



It's a classic example of many of the hypocritical theorums within the radical, fundamentalist-religious, movement. The cheif of which is indoctrication.

And this, from my perspective, seems to be what seperates progressives from the Right-Wing within society. It is an example that is manifested at its most lunatic-fringe height.

Buy strict definition, progress means to learn from your mistakes and grow. The Right, and their conservative ideoloy, tend not to learn from mistakes, but would rather ignore those missteps and cast aspersion on those that they disagree with.

What are the people within the WBC attempting to do - aside from offend people from both sides of the aisle?

The two young ladies in the video are examples of ignorance run amok. And they are more than willing to display that same ignorance as if it were divine scripture.

How do people get to such a point?

The one thing that gets me is when I hear people say this - what if they are right?

Remnants Of A Failed Presidency

This would have been an interesting moment to witness:

Two years after launching the most technologically savvy presidential campaign in history, Obama officials ran smack into the constraints of the federal bureaucracy yesterday, encountering a jumble of disconnected phone lines, old computer software, and security regulations forbidding outside e-mail accounts.

What does that mean in 21st-century terms? No Facebook to communicate with supporters. No outside e-mail log-ins. No instant messaging. Hard adjustments for a staff that helped sweep Obama to power through, among other things, relentless online social networking.

"It is kind of like going from an Xbox to an Atari," Obama spokesman Bill Burton said of his new digs.

More here from The Washington Post

Although I am not nearly as tech-savvy as I wish I were, but one would think that the White House of all places would be equipped as it was needed.