Media

The blunt truth is, Matt Drudge has probably had more influence deciding the political narrative in Washington than any individual in America, except President Obama in 2008 with his "hope and change" agenda that has largely disappeared.

When I refer to the power of Drudge, I refer to the power to determine and define the political story line that dominates our national debate. It is more than Drudge. Just as the Obama campaign dominated the story line in 2008, the Tea Party movement dominated the story line in 2010 and (for better or worse) the Tea Party story line still rules our debate today.

Drudge has what liberals and Democrats lack: a coherent and consistent narrarative about American politics, the ability to drive that narrative through multiple media and the staying power to drive the narrative year after year, relentlessly and successfully.

Fox News should fire Glenn Beck because there are some "opinions" that should not be given prominence on a network that purports to be a serious news station. Beck has the right to express his opinions, but a publicly traded company that presumes to be a credible news network should not be aiding and abetting the spreading of hate using its shareholders' money on the public airwaves.

Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) should denounce the birthers clearly, unequivocally, immediately and unconditionally and should state, without qualification, that President Obama is a Christian and an American. A leader of one of our two great parties, and the leader of the whole House of Representatives, which is the true role of the Speaker, should not give one ounce of credence to the politics of lies and hate, or leave one inch of doubt that he condemns the politics of lies and hate.

When Keith Olbermann joins forces with Al Gore and Current TV, it will be a bonanza day for progressives that will generate an excitement and enthusiasm that will benefit Current TV, MSNBC, the progressive movement and progressive media as a whole.

The most underrepresented audience group on television today is the large progressive movement in America. MSNBC has tapped into this movement, which is why MSNBC has surpassed CNN in the ratings.

If Keith Olbermann joins forces with Al Gore it will be powerful and good for Current TV, for the progressive movement, and in my view for MSNBC as well.

After I ended my time working for Democratic leaders in Congress and went into (real) business, my most significant client was Frank Sinatra through his agency. Great talent often comes with great tumult. Keith Olbermann was and remains a giant talent, and what happened last week was regrettable but not surprising.

Recent press reports about the continuing adventures of WikiLeaks assure: 1) that this phenomenon will not go away anytime soon; 2) that the definition and role of media is changing in warp speed; 3) and that the virtue of whistleblowers is in question.

1. That the Wiki phenomenon isn’t going away is clear. The latest news reports are that Wiki is about to publicize thousands of private records of the Swiss bank Julius Baer, embarrassing, and possibly incriminating, politicians, business leaders, “pillars of society.” Wiki leader Julian Assange claims this new trove of secret documents will “educate society” about money-laundering by worldwide banks and their ultra-wealthy depositors.

In the aftermath of the attempted assassination of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), there has been near-hysteria about the tenor of our political culture. Has the inflammatory rhetoric gone too far? Is there too much vitriol in American politics? Is the Tea Party movement to blame?

This entire pointed conversation about our current state of political affairs — spearheaded largely by the American left — reveals a serious lack of self-reflection or historical perspective.

For those who feel compelled to point fingers at conservative radio personalities, Sarah Palin or the more indistinct Tea Party, they ought to take some time to read Joanne Freeman’s Affairs of Honor: National Politics in the New Republic. If one is under the illusion that there was ever a golden era of political politeness, the Yale University professor of American history will tell you otherwise. “Regional distrust, personal animosity, accusation, suspicion, implication, and denouncement,” Freeman writes, “was the tenor of national politics from the outset.” 

It has been a tough December for media darlings in American politics.

Let’s give three examples:

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) faces a barrage of criticism from New Jersey voters for choosing to continue vacationing in sunny Florida while voters were deluged with snow, ice and blizzard. His Republican lieutenant governor was in Mexico during the blizzard, visiting an ill relative. No fault in that, but the governor should have been at his desk dealing with the blizzard and not engaging in leisure, entertainment, sporting and bathing pursuits while New Jersey voters were suffering the snow.

There's a possible expectation of "accountability journalism" that includes fact-checking of interviewees and realtime challenge of misstatements. That also includes coverage of important but buried stories, wherein mainstream media is called to task for lack of coverage, etc.

The best recent example of this was the last episode of "The Daily Show," where accountability journalism was executed brilliantly. This could have a dramatic effect on American politics, and out here, we feel we sure need it.

Whatever else he has accomplished, Julian Assange through WikiLeaks has opened for examination important questions about the new journalism and the appropriate use of the Internet. Is Wiki a publisher? Is it practicing journalism? Does it create more problems of invasion of privacy than transform an overly secret society to one more open and thus more democratic?

"WikiLeaks changes everything,” Christian Caryl wrote recently in The New York Review of Books. The sheer volume of its uncurated disclosures of secret information of government and business is unprecedented. Caryl concluded that he didn’t “see coherently articulated morality, or immorality, at work here at all; what I see is an amoral, technocratic void.” One’s view of WikiLeaks may vary among generations for that very reason — the younger being more sympathetic to Assange’s views. My older generation sees the younger’s downloading music and movies as stealing from the Internet, and many also see Wiki's disclosures as theft — dangerous theft at that, as it might unnecessarily hurt people through its indiscriminate use.

The Chicago elections commissioners ruled, in my opinion, the rational way, when they declared Rahm Emanuel a resident of Chicago and thus good to go on the ballot for the Feb. 22 nonpartisan primary for mayor.

The next day, Friday, both Chicago papers offered not only reporting but also editorials praising the decision. “Rahm wins Round 1” declared the Tribune. “Election board gets it right on Emanuel,” declared the Sun-Times.

But it was The New York Times national edition that gave Rahm the most lavish coverage that day — and the Times is likely in the Chicago homes of many of Emanuel’s upscale supporters and financial backers. On the front page, just below the fold, ran a three-column-wide photo of a hatless, smiling Rahm shaking hands with a pretty commuter, her blond hair visible under her pink hat. “Cleared for Takeoff in Chicago,” read the caption headline.