The L.A. Times brings word of the launch of WTFCNN.com, a site created by a frequent visitor to CNN.com who finally got too "frustrated by what headlines" appear on the website to continue without commenting in some way.
I'm beginning to see a way for everyone to co-exist in this media ecosystem! Beat reporters can inure their subjects into expecting fawning treatment from journalists, and then freelancers can come in and actually break big stories.
I've watched several news anchors slap themselves silly in stunned befuddlement over Rolling Stone's coup. I sort of wondered why the traditional media couldn't have done more, with all of their access!
I imagine that Rolling Stone now understands that the White House will respond very quickly the next time the commander in charge of our controversial war puts the entire operation in jeopardy over some ill-advised sass talk.
Did the rampant coverage of the health care reform debate leave you utterly beside yourself with confusion? Well, you're not alone -- that's exactly how the media covered the matter, because they are terrible.
All this talk of maybe doing something half-assed about the massive failure that caused a nation of dutiful taxpayers to suffer soon filtered back to some (sym)pathetic journalists at the New York Post.
Jeff Zeleny reported that Democrats were avoiding town hall appearances to avoid "voter rage." Is it true? Well, your definition of "avoiding town hall meetings" would have to be "holding a lot of town hall meetings." So: no.
The quality the Prizes instill retain readers and boost staff morale. I can get behind that thesis. Or, rather, I could get behind this thesis, but unfortunately, I have to view it in context of the Post's actual Pulitzer winners.