Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

forum=sanctuary lives!Follow

#1 Jun 21 2013 at 6:19 PM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,570 posts
http://gawker.com/here-is-the-archive-of-the-famous-liberal-media-journo-530195415

Quote:
Way back in 2009, the hottest media story was the exposure of the existence of "Journolist," a private listserv of several hundred mostly liberal journalists, talking to each other about crap. This was perceived as a big scandal! Andrew Breitbart offered $100,000 for the full archives. Well, we got (some of) them. Here they are.

The existence of Journolist— either a boring listserv among friends and colleagues, or a secret backchannel in which the true feelings of the liberal media elite came to light, depending on who you talked to— was quite a little media sensation, several years ago.

Actually, I never heard of this back in 2009 when it happened. The only update now is the data dump of the archives.
____________________________
Na Zdrowie
#2 Jun 21 2013 at 7:35 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
20,576 posts
trickybeck wrote:
Actually, I never heard of this back in 2009 when it happened.

I bet gbaji can tell you why.
#3 Jun 21 2013 at 8:15 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I'm surprised Breitbart didn't just write his own archives and run a story about them.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#4 Jun 21 2013 at 9:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,570 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I'm surprised Breitbart didn't just write his own archives and run a story about them.

He got caught up in the karma circle jerk. Happens to the best of 'em.
____________________________
Na Zdrowie
#5 Jun 22 2013 at 1:25 AM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
Allegory wrote:
trickybeck wrote:
Actually, I never heard of this back in 2009 when it happened.

I bet gbaji can tell you why.
I bet it's all Jophs fault.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#6 Jun 22 2013 at 9:29 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
28,224 posts
trickybeck wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
I'm surprised Breitbart didn't just write his own archives and run a story about them.

He got caught up in the karma circle jerk. Happens to the best of 'em.


Rated up just to underscore your point.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#7 Jun 24 2013 at 6:06 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
15,905 posts
Quote:
Way back in 2009, the hottest media story was the exposure of the existence of "Journolist,"
Really?

i must have been out-to-lunch that year - i totally missed it.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#8 Jun 24 2013 at 7:43 AM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
Well, Michael Jackson died that year, so you were probably distracted by the evil liberal media.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#9 Jun 24 2013 at 11:06 AM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
Michael Jackson died in 2007.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#10 Jun 24 2013 at 11:13 AM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
Are you sure about that?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#11 Jun 24 2013 at 11:16 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,756 posts
I'm not sure about anything that's happened for several years now.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#12 Jun 24 2013 at 11:39 AM Rating: Good
lolgaxe wrote:
Are you sure about that?

Yes. Smiley: frown
____________________________
Love,
PunkFloyd
#13 Jun 24 2013 at 11:53 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
15,905 posts
Wiki was out to lunch with me in 2009. We both missed Journolist.

...and it sounded SO exciting. Smiley: frown
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#14 Jun 24 2013 at 4:20 PM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Are you sure about that?
Quite sure, I'm talking about the writer though. I care more for beer and whiskey than pop songs and dance moves.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#15 Jun 25 2013 at 7:26 AM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
No one cares about writers.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#16 Jun 25 2013 at 10:01 AM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
He wrote about beer and whiskey though.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#17 Jun 25 2013 at 10:05 AM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
So do the people at beeradvocate.com.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#18 Jun 25 2013 at 10:15 AM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
Yeah but they haven't written some of the most influential books on beer and/or whiskey in the past 100+ years.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#19 Jun 25 2013 at 3:04 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,593 posts
Allegory wrote:
trickybeck wrote:
Actually, I never heard of this back in 2009 when it happened.

I bet gbaji can tell you why.


I seem to recall mentioning it once or twice on the forum as an example of something that the media was avoiding talking about. So unless you actually watch/listen to conservative news sources, it's not surprising that you would never have heard about it, or only heard it in the context of "here's some crazy conservative conspiracy theory we can all laugh at and dismiss". It was basically a bunch of liberal journalists who would coordinate their stories so as to maximize the impact of ones they wanted told, while minimizing the impact of those that didn't jive with their political leanings. Which, by itself, might only be of mild concern except that there were a number of liberal political operatives on the list as well, giving rise to the suggestion that the journalists on the list were essentially helping to manipulate public perception of political events to aid specific political groups and candidates (all liberal of course).


It was a big deal among conservatives because we had long suspected some kind of collusion among liberal journalists. It was just too obvious when nearly every major news outlet would all take the exact same take on a given story on the same day, almost like they were sharing notes before writing their editorials or stories. The list showed that at the very least, they were doing precisely that. And while it's nearly impossible to prove, it opens up the possibility that they were deliberately orchestrating the appearance of various stories in order to maximize their impact (or minimize the impact of some other story). One guy writing an op ed about something doesn't have much impact. But when 10 different journalists from 10 different outlets all choose to write an op ed with the same opinion on the same issue within a few days, it creates a story about the op eds, and suddenly that viewpoint is being discussed as news before a broader audience. It's how you launder opinion into the appearance of fact. A news show can't (in theory) just present opinions, but they can do a story about opinions. So if you can get enough buzz about some op ed, you create an excuse for the news to cover it, and now most viewers will give greater weight to the opinion itself because it was on the news instead of just in an editorial.


And when those opinions are being pushed by political policy, you've got a potential scandal. But of course, no one covered the story. Surprise!
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#20 Jun 25 2013 at 3:26 PM Rating: Good
Allegory wrote:
trickybeck wrote:
Actually, I never heard of this back in 2009 when it happened.

I bet gbaji can tell you why.


gbaji wrote:
I seem to recall mentioning it once or twice on the forum as an example of something that the media was avoiding talking about.
Forum search says otherwise; nice try.


gbaji wrote:
that didn't jive with their political leanings
JIBE, not jive. Aren't you supposed to know, like, 200x more about everything than the rest of us?



gbaji wrote:
It was a big deal among conservatives because we had long suspected some kind of collusion among liberal journalists.
Because the conservatives do the same thing. What are you, nine years old?
____________________________
Allegory wrote:
Bijou your art is exceptionally creepy. It seems like their should be something menacing about it, yet no such tone is present.
#21 Jun 25 2013 at 4:11 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,593 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
Allegory wrote:
trickybeck wrote:
Actually, I never heard of this back in 2009 when it happened.

I bet gbaji can tell you why.


gbaji wrote:
I seem to recall mentioning it once or twice on the forum as an example of something that the media was avoiding talking about.
Forum search says otherwise; nice try.


Don't know if forum searches are working past like a year back. If you change your search from "journolist" to "journalist", the oldest post with that word in it is in 2012. You don't honestly think no one wrote the word "journalist" on this forum until about a year ago, do you?


Quote:
gbaji wrote:
that didn't jive with their political leanings
JIBE, not jive. Aren't you supposed to know, like, 200x more about everything than the rest of us?


Do you speak Jive?


Quote:
gbaji wrote:
It was a big deal among conservatives because we had long suspected some kind of collusion among liberal journalists.
Because the conservatives do the same thing. What are you, nine years old?


Which is interesting given that you're basically saying that two wrongs make a right. Jimmy did it, so it's ok for me to! Also, you're excusing known behavior by one group because of speculated behavior among another. So because liberals think that conservatives will do something nefarious, they feel it's ok for them to do it? Um... What if they're wrong about their assumption? What if they're projecting their own willingness to break the rules on conservatives in order to justify what they're doing (It's ok to do this cause we all know that conservatives would do it too).

That doesn't make what they were doing right, and it doesn't change the fact that a group of liberal journalists were actually caught doing it. Now, if someone catches conservatives doing this, then we can discuss that separately. But it's pretty weak to use the potential as an excuse for the actual.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#22 Jun 26 2013 at 8:22 AM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
gbaji wrote:
Don't know if forum searches are working past like a year back. If you change your search from "journolist" to "journalist", the oldest post with that word in it is in 2012. You don't honestly think no one wrote the word "journalist" on this forum until about a year ago, do you?
While the forum search is broken, Google and Bing both work just fine and there is no results for Journolist and zam.com/allakhazam.com for the time period between 01/01/1901 and 12/31/2011.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#23 Jun 26 2013 at 8:42 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Sure, but what about in 1899?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#24 Jun 26 2013 at 8:43 AM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
I think the better question is what happened in 1900 that you don't want known.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#25 Jun 26 2013 at 3:52 PM Rating: Good
gbaji wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
It was a big deal among conservatives because we had long suspected some kind of collusion among liberal journalists.
Because the conservatives do the same thing. What are you, nine years old?
gbaji wrote:
Which is interesting given that you're basically saying that two wrongs make a right.
No, you idiot. I simply recognize that any given media source has a political bent and are likely to collude with others of their ilk to send similar messages. Again; are you nine?
____________________________
Allegory wrote:
Bijou your art is exceptionally creepy. It seems like their should be something menacing about it, yet no such tone is present.
#26 Jun 27 2013 at 12:25 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,593 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
It was a big deal among conservatives because we had long suspected some kind of collusion among liberal journalists.
Because the conservatives do the same thing. What are you, nine years old?
gbaji wrote:
Which is interesting given that you're basically saying that two wrongs make a right.
No, you idiot. I simply recognize that any given media source has a political bent and are likely to collude with others of their ilk to send similar messages. Again; are you nine?


And yet, it was a group of liberal journalists and political operatives who were caught doing so and not conservative journalists and operatives. So your excuse of "conservatives do it to!" isn't really legitimate off the bat. Additionally, "it's ok cause someone else does it to" is a crappy excuse for bad behavior. It's either something our media should not be doing, or something that you think is perfectly ok. If you think it's ok, then say so. Don't excuse it by claiming that conservatives do the same thing.

Do you think it's perfectly ok for journalists to collude with political operatives to help "their side" with public perception of issues? If you do, then stand on that principle and defend it. I happen to think it's not ok, but I'd like to hear what you think.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#27 Jun 27 2013 at 12:26 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,650 posts
gbaji wrote:
Do you think it's perfectly ok for journalists to collude with political operatives to help "their side" with public perception of issues?
Helps Fox News' ratings.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#28 Jun 27 2013 at 12:36 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Additionally, "it's ok cause someone else does it to" is a crappy excuse for bad behavior.

lulz

What if they say the big bad conservatives MADE them do it so they could compete since the big bad conservatives are doing it too? From what I understand, that's a valid excuse for everything under the sun Smiley: laugh

Edited, Jun 27th 2013 1:37pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#29 Jun 27 2013 at 12:59 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
15,905 posts
gbaji wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
It was a big deal among conservatives because we had long suspected some kind of collusion among liberal journalists.
Because the conservatives do the same thing. What are you, nine years old?
gbaji wrote:
Which is interesting given that you're basically saying that two wrongs make a right.
No, you idiot. I simply recognize that any given media source has a political bent and are likely to collude with others of their ilk to send similar messages. Again; are you nine?


And yet, it was a group of liberal journalists and political operatives who were caught doing so and not conservative journalists and operatives. So your excuse of "conservatives do it to!" isn't really legitimate off the bat. Additionally, "it's ok cause someone else does it to" is a crappy excuse for bad behavior. It's either something our media should not be doing, or something that you think is perfectly ok. If you think it's ok, then say so. Don't excuse it by claiming that conservatives do the same thing.

Do you think it's perfectly ok for journalists to collude with political operatives to help "their side" with public perception of issues? If you do, then stand on that principle and defend it. I happen to think it's not ok, but I'd like to hear what you think.

I think you're both talking poo-poo. There was nothing in that archive that reaches even the kneecaps of collusion.



Edited, Jun 27th 2013 9:00pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#30 Jun 27 2013 at 6:27 PM Rating: Good
gbaji wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
It was a big deal among conservatives because we had long suspected some kind of collusion among liberal journalists.
Because the conservatives do the same thing. What are you, nine years old?
gbaji wrote:
Which is interesting given that you're basically saying that two wrongs make a right.
No, you idiot. I simply recognize that any given media source has a political bent and are likely to collude with others of their ilk to send similar messages. Again; are you nine?
And yet, it was a group of liberal journalists and political operatives who were caught doing so and not conservative journalists and operatives. So your excuse of "conservatives do it to!" isn't really legitimate off the bat. Additionally, "it's ok cause someone else does it to" is a crappy excuse for bad behavior. It's either something our media should not be doing, or something that you think is perfectly ok. If you think it's ok, then say so. Don't excuse it by claiming that conservatives do the same thing.

Do you think it's perfectly ok for journalists to collude with political operatives to help "their side" with public perception of issues? If you do, then stand on that principle and defend it. I happen to think it's not ok, but I'd like to hear what you think.
I went ahead and slightly highlited the part you obviously missed.
Does it indicate me being ok with it? No? Huh.

And no, I don't think consevative mediapeople do this secretly; I observe that they do it openly.

So, no, media shouldn't do this. But they do anyway. THAT was my observation, you thunder-dolt. All the handwringing about it is a distration for fools. Which is, obviously, the goal.
____________________________
Allegory wrote:
Bijou your art is exceptionally creepy. It seems like their should be something menacing about it, yet no such tone is present.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 61 All times are in CDT