"I Have Some Meth in my Pocket" -- at Least One Cable News Personality Told the Truth Last Week

CNN reporter Richard Quest told police who stopped him last week that he had some meth in his pocket. And guess what? He did have some meth in his pocket, according to reports. So that may have been the most honest thing a TV news personality said all week.

Contrast Quest's refreshing candor with the chart Wolf Blitzer put up last week, purportedly to show the relative wealth of the Presidential candidates. And who's pictured on the leftmost side of the chart, signifying that he has the least money and is most like "regular folks"? Why, John McCain, even though his wife has more than $100 million in assets - money that generated even more revenue in interests and investment income. Bill Clinton's income was added to Hillary's, and Michelle Obama's was added to Barack's - but as far as CNN viewers were concerned, Maverick John was just trudging along on $400,000 a year or so.

Cindy McCain's income is invisible to CNN, but Bill Clinton's isn't. And the Clinton marriage remains the subject of tawdry speculation while the unsavory circumstances of the McCain courtship stays under wraps.

It gets worse. During CNN's grossly distorted presentation, Dana Bash falsely said that "John McCain donated about 26 percent of his income to charity (whereas) the Clintons gave 15 percent - and the Obamas, they gave 6 percent." Add in Cindy's wealth, of course, and those numbers change drastically. But CNN's viewers will never know. "Generous John," they'll think, "barely getting by - and yet giving so much."

This report came from the same Wolf Blitzer who edited footage in order to mislead viewers into thinking that McCain, after making a serious misstatement of fact about Iraq, corrected himself (he was really corrected by his congenial factotum, Joe Lieberman). Blitzer's move would have been seen as Orwellian if it had come from a government agency. But because our country has outsourced its thought control to private corporations, the manipulation somehow seems doesn't seem quite as frightening. It should be even more scary ...

It's unclear whether ideology, friendship, or other motives underlie deceptions like Blitzer's. It probably varies by reporter. What's important is that only reporters who practice these deceptions get the job. Here's a glimpse into the reasons why, as deftly summarized by Dana Milbank:

"John McCain and Barack Obama both appeared before the nation's newspaper editors yesterday. The putative Republican presidential nominee was given a box of doughnuts and a standing ovation. The likely Democratic nominee was likened to a terrorist."

It doesn't matter whether a reporter distorts the facts in favor of McCain out of ideological preference, or just because they like the guy. What matters is that only those reporters will get to cover the campaign - because the publishers making those decisions want the Republican to win.

Glenn Greenwald commented at length on this weekend's New York Times story - the one that showed that most TV military "experts" were being coordinated and manipulated by a Pentagon establishment that was feeding them lucrative contracts. Glenn says this is old news, and he's right - though I also understand the commenter who said we shouldn't try to "out-blasé" one another. But to me, the striking thing about David Barstow's Times article is the tawdry parade of "analysts" and network executives who claim they were deceived by the Pentagon propaganda machine. Those claims are disingenous.

And by "disingenous," of course, what I mean to say is: "total bullshit."

The analysts, executives, newspaper reporters, and television "personalities" (I can't bring myself to call them "reporters") go to the same parties, attend the same conferences, see each other on a daily basis. Execs and journos alike were well aware that guests like Jeffrey D. McCausland and John Garrett were feeding at the Pentagon trough. If any didn't know, they should resign immediately on the grounds of incompetence and irresponsibility. But they won't: U.S. news is the worst kind of conspiracy: a conspiracy of shared values and interests.

There is a clique of media execs, journalists, politicians, and co-opted "independent" experts. They sold America the war in Iraq, and now they're trying to sell it John McCain. And guess what? They'll probably succeed.

Those Democrats who think they're going to in November should take fair warning: The fix is in. The Conspiracy of Shared Values has chosen McCain, and they don't usually lose. The guy who was stopped in Central Park with the meth in his pocket was caught red-handed, so he came clean. But his colleagues are just going to keep on walking.

A Night Light

The Sentinel Effect: Healthcare Blog

Comments

[EspritDeVoltaire]

"CNN reporter Richard Quest told police who stopped him last week that he had some meth in his pocket." - If this doesn't prove that our so called journalists are nothing but authority worshipping sock puppets, I don't know what would.

[burque]

you get ten demerits

failure to use spell check x 2 key uses:

By "disingenous" I think you mean "disingenuous".

[SeriousBlack]

I always thought that Richard Quest was just a little TOO "perky". I guess we know the reason now. But seriously, it sounds like he wanted to get caught - I hope he gets the treatment he needs to kick the habit.

[StillAmused]

Optimism can be high-risk in the present political climate, but the bright lights have yet to be turned on McCain. 'Coverage' has so far consisted of yawning, even indulgent eye-rolling over his alarming gaffes and even-more-alarming pronouncements.

When the Democrats' horse race has run its course, the press will be dragged, kicking and screaming, to the stark reality of the last in a failed series of inflatable 'super heroes' cynically auditioned by the GOP.

The "Roo-Dee" balloon popped unceremoniously. Fred "clang-clang" who? Mitt "I saved the Olympics"? They're left with a "war hero" who garnered his 'aura' in the most ignominious -- if personally painful -- way possible... shot down while bombing people he couldn't see, from 10,000 feet, over North Vietnam.

McCain's entire "campaign" is actually the conclusion of the longest-running "welcome home" celebration in U.S. history.

Someone break out the grainy Hanoi Hilton footage. The Republicans can all hold hands and weep.

Even the bought-and-paid-for press may throw up a little in their mouths.

[WilliePilgrim]

If the current "drug war a la witch burning" frenzy in this country were a thing of the past, this incident wouldn't have turned into anything more than a comment on a curfew violation, which evidently is all that it was. In a sane society people have the right to be unmolested for their personal behavior provided they are acting responsibly and not disturbing the peace, which evidently Mr Q for all his other characteristics, seems to have been doing.

[LifeIsBrief]

"Those Democrats who think they're going to when in November should take fair warning: The fix is in."

RJ, I think you meant "win in November".

[LeonBNJ]

Corporate control of media is nothing new, even going back to the late 1800's. William Herast created the 'yellow journalism' we have today and advocated war (the Spanish-American War). Other newspapers had defenite biases as to certain political parties even if against the views of most of their readers, some were severely anti-immigrant and many racist, ignored the lack of government regulation in many areas of life, very anti-union and so on. Then you have the pressure not to offend the corporate advertisers from where they get their income. While there have been times where media was neutral or advocated positive benefits to society, their interest has always been to make money. That means reporters cannot do the stories they should, have to be somewhat dishonest with the public and take subsidies from those they cover (like we recently seen reported on the Pentagon's control of the media in Iraq).
Richard Quest has serious problems and one has to wonder if by hiding them in the past he compormised his reporting.

[Stevelagain]

The "Meth" analogy was a mistake and painful because it does destroy people. It's hard to be glib when imagining the poor guy who was destroying his life.

[AnotherTry]

The only thing destroying his life now is getting caught and arrested. If he hadn't been caught, he could have gone on for who knows how long enjoying his life of drugs and kinky sex and you would be none the wiser. Happens all the time.

But now his career is done, his life is basically ruined because we have decided that some drugs are more legal than others. When the reality is most drugs can be used in moderation with little adverse side effects.

I'm not advocating meth use, but it's his life and unless he is hurting someone, it is shouldn't be anyone's business.

[euthyfro]

Yeah, when i was 21 & inhaling vaporized meth (you're not technically smoking it, just heating it until it changes states of matter from solid to liquid to gas, so you have to exhale quickly to avoid it re-solidifying in your lungs) out of a hollowed out light-bulb, a vein in my basal ganglia hemorrhaged all over my brain. 6 years later & i've still got a limp & almost no use of my right arm.

That being said, there is still no reason why marijuana is illegal while nicotine & alcohol are legal. Prozac and many other mood stabilizing drugs produce just as many side-effects as and are toxic at far lower levels than MDMA (ecstacy) which has at least as many valid therapeutic uses if clinical trials would be allowed.

We got some truly fucked up drug-policy in the USA and politicians of both parties refuse to apply reason to the subject. So...

"I have a dream...
We will some day be
One RAVE NATION!!!" --Undercover Anarchist featuring Juggernaut

[donwilkerson]

Mr. Eskow, you do realize that you are praising someone who told the "truth" while high on meth, with a rope tied to his dick, or nuts? Oh, and he was in a known cruising area in Central Park at 3am in the morning. Did I mention the rope?

[bobdob]

"I have my neck tied to my balls."

At least someone still remembers how to party in this country.

[Snowball]

This is why it is imperative to refer to the media as the Corporate Media, not the MSM or, even worse, the Traditional Media as Kos advocates and as some who blog here have followed suit. Only Corporate Media adequately explains the institutional right wing bias of our media system. We cannot hope to combat this bias if we don't acknowledge and describe the vested interests of the corporate entities that control our media.

[GoodwithWood]

You"re right. I pledge to call it like it is from now on. "Corporate Media"

GWW

[CeciliaBertrand]

very old news to me -- glad it is reaching mainstream -- eventually if enough people pay attention, NO ONE will watch these morons and programming will HAVE TO CHANGE - preferably in upgrade to honesty and integrity and oh yes, intelligence!!

In the meantime, lets stick together via blogs, et al and get the real news out that way...it is our vote afterall.

[Raffi]

Terrific article. Thanks RJ

[Desiderata]

You're right, they are not "reporters." They are nothing more than paid spokespersons for the fascist New World Order. To go against their bosses and report the truth risks loss of their comfortable lifestyles. They don't want to wake up one morning and find themselves living among us and facing our kind of struggles.

The Corporate Media does allow a couple of truth tellers, though, just to give us the cathartic release of our anger (Olbermann comes to mind), but the fact that Fox has not suffered catastrophic ratings collapse in these troubled times proves only the Internet stands as a challenge to their information monopoly. Internet Neutrality will be held off until after the General Election; then the USA will be no better than China in information control of the internet .