December 01, 2005

12/1: The Nano Edition

As we promised yesterday, we return today with a bit more reax to Pres. Bush's 11/30 Iraq speech. Unlike his immigration speech from earlier in the week, this one slipped through no cracks -- it was easily the most-blogged story of the past 24 hours. Beyond that: a report that the U.S. military is planting stories in the Iraqi press gained wider attention as the day wore on and the SCOTUS held oral arguments on its 1st major abortion case in 5 years. And we present our latest Blogger Spotlight.

Today's edition of the Blogometer will be an abbrev. one, as we're live-blogging the Hotline/UVA 8th Annual American Democracy Conf. for Hotline On Call at the Hotel Washington in scenic federal DC (and also on C-SPAN).

BUSH SPEECH: So I Married A Reax Murderer

From the right:

• National Review's Rich Lowry: "One rhetorical problem the administration has had in the Iraq debate is that it has put itself in a 'stay the course' box that suggests to people that we aren't going to do anything differently, when they don't particularly like the way things have been going in Iraq. ... Bush and his speechwriters finally got out of the box today."
• Under the header "Read My Lips: No New Timetables," Captain's Quarters writes: "George Bush made his case clear today in a largely uneventful speech at Annapolis today simply by repeated the same plan he has enumerated for the American public for over two years."
• At Hugh Hewitt's site, Mary Katherine Ham ticks off a few accomplishments Bush listed, such as "90 square miles of Baghdad province turned over to Iraqi security forces," adding: "This is where I wish he would use some good, old-fashioned charts and pointers. A little too Ross Perot?"
• Michelle Malkin is pleased that Bush read from a letter by a Marine Cpl. killed in Iraq -- a letter Malkin had previously reported was "butchered by the New York Times."
• Not all were pleased, including Pundit Guy: "The publication of this plan is nothing more than a public relations ploy to quell discontent, and although it's hard to say it, this maneuver seems awkward at best. I'm embarrassed by it and I hate that."
• PoliPundit selects this line from the speech as "quote of the day": "These decisions about troop levels will be driven by the conditions on the ground in Iraq and the good judgment of our commanders, not by artificial timetables set by politicians in Washington."

From the left:

• Think tank-backed Think Progress went up quickly with a "rapid response" post criticizing the strategy document: "The problem is, it's not a new strategy for success in Iraq; it's a public relations document. The strategy describes what has transpired in Iraq to date as a resounding success and stubbornly refuses to establish any standards for accountability."
• Header at The Left Coaster: "No Measurable Benchmarks In Bush Iraq Strategy."
• Steve Clemons: "George Bush's speech this morning is almost entirely a counter-point response to James Fallows' important cover story in the Atlantic Monthly this month. Bush seems to be asserting that Fallows' assessment and math are wrong. ... The President's assertions about the great successes training Iraqi forces do not stand up to scrutiny."
• Media Matters' Oliver Willis, at his own site: "There's really no concrete definition of victory here, still. But it seems that they're saying we don't leave until Iraq is a full western style democracy ... So when do we leave Iraq? According to this document, apparently when candy canes and unicorns take command."
• Left I on the News objects to the term "rejectionists," but "accepting Bush's words on their face, what is he saying? That the Sunnis are fighting to be the dominant group in Iraq. Perhaps they are. Who the hell is the U.S. to stick not only their nose, but the barrel of their guns, into that fight on the side of the other side, i.e., the Shiites?" Arianna Huffington feels the same about "rejectionists": "It's Victory Through Vocabulary!"
• Nitpicker: "Meet the new plan. Same as the old 'plan.'"

More on the speech:

• Kris Alexander at center-left milblog Intel Dump: "I think it was one of the better speeches of his administration. He did a good job of explaining some of what is happening in Iraq. ... The middle part of the speech was the real meat of what he had to say, and he told me some things that I did not know about what the Iraqi security forces have accomplished. And that's a problem. I'm a fairly well informed person. I should know these things."
• Some conservatives were unhappy with the media coverage. Bill Hobbs criticized the Los Angeles Times' summary as "filled with omissions and spin," particularly its mention of how "many Iraqi units simply melted away" during the Fallujah fight: "But the LAT fails to mention that" since then "there has been very good progress." Gateway Pundit picked apart some news stories that report the good news as "hearsay": "This could be a historic time for the Western media. After reporting that the war has been a complete failure for months and two years, they now have to change their whole storyline while trying to save face at the same time. What a quagmire they've dug for themselves!"
• Gay Patriot derided John Kerry's after-speech rebuttal, calling him a "perennial weathervane."
• Wonkette posted a brief series of images of Bush and his slogans at Iraq-related speeches between "Mission Accomplished" and the 11/30 address.

IRAQ: Pay For Play

As noted here yesterday, Los Angeles Times reports that the U.S. military has been "secretly paying Iraqi newspapers to publish stories written by American troops in an effort to burnish the image of the U.S. mission in Iraq." It took a few hours to be widely discussed, but so it was.

Justin Gardner, for The Moderate Voice: "Reports like this make my toes curl. Do they not realize that actions like these simply create an atmosphere where it's easier to compare us to Saddam? Couple stuff like this with our torture policy, and you have a recipe for credibility damage."

At Informed Comment, lefty Juan Cole observes that some of these articles "may then get translated by the Foreign Broadcast Information Service of the CIA, the articles from which in turn are often picked up by BBC World Monitoring; or Iraqi bloggers may put out the information and perspective so that it gets into English. The Pentagon is forbidden from planting articles in the US press, but this method gets around the prohibition."

Right-leaning Vodkapundit: "Smart move, given that the Iraq Campaign is one small part of the Terror War -- in which the media is the arm of decision. If you don't manage information, you lose. ... What we ought to be told -- and what the story doesn't make clear -- is whether the Pentagon intentionally admitted to this (legal) program, or if it was 'outed' by an overzealous press."

• MoveOn has pulled their ad featuring British troops meant to represent U.S. troops (see 11/30 Blogometer). Bloggers including Michelle Malkin and In The Bullpen give credit to WSJ's James Taranto, who led with the item in his 11/29 column.

WHITE HOUSE '08: Reverse Psychology

Conservative Tom Maguire is grudgingly impressed with Sen. Hillary Clinton's (D-NY) letter to constituents about Iraq, quoting from it: "I take responsibility for my vote, and I, along with a majority of Americans, expect the president and his administration to take responsibility for the false assurances, faulty evidence and mismanagement of the war." Maguire: "Hmmph. If she would just kow-tow to the party line, al la John Kerry, and admit that she was duped and deceived, we would be delighted to mock her. Instead, we have to move to Stop Hillary, Plan B -- get behind her! Yeah, that's it! If righties start saying nice things about her, she will be alienated from the left forever."

MIDTERMS '06: Netwar

Kennedy Vs. The Machine, which backs Rep. Mark Kennedy (R) for MN SEN, noted on 11/30 that the Blogger account for their former site, Dayton V. Kennedy [defunct] was overtaken by a blogger at MN Publius, which backs Hennepin Co. Atty Amy Klobuchar (D) for the same office. MNP posted a letter mocking the old site, which KVM reposts, noting that the hijacking deleted all their archives: "As you might imagine, it was not pleasant having months of work destroyed. ... Kennedy vs. The Machine has always understood that politics is a full-contact sport. Where we erred was in thinking it was a battle over contending ideas -- not cyber sabotage."

In a later post, MN Publius explains back at their own site: "Today I discovered that the old Dayton v. Kennedy blogger account had gone unused for such a period that it was up for grabs by anyone with a blogger account. In what I thought would amount to little more than a practical joke, I claimed the up-for-grabs site and put up a post ridiculing the Dayton v. Kennedy blog. What I did not realize is that in doing so the archives would be removed from the site. For this I am truly sorry. I have removed myself from the blog's administrator role and left it alone."

IN THE STATES: Unfrozen Caveman Executive Director?

CO GOP exec. dir. Hans Gullickson sent an e-mail wide on 11/30 warning that the party "has recently obtained information giving us reason to believe that the website ColoradoPols.com is surreptitiously collecting information about individuals who post on its website. It's important to note that ColoradoPols.com apparently does not have a privacy agreement and has refused to address the issue of a privacy agreement when asked to do so. Therefore individuals who post on this site should have no expectation of privacy or anonymity. We strongly suspect that the individuals running this site will use all kinds of reasoning and rationale to discredit this memo; in fact we will be disappointed if they don't try."

Colorado Pols doesn't disappoint, explaining the information collection: "Like every damned website that has ever existed, our server keeps a log of IP addresses that visit the site as well as a record of the top pages visited. We have never been interested in analyzing the IP addresses of visitors with regard to comments, frequency of visits, or anything else except for filtering spam content. We are pleased to note steady growth in readership over the last year and a half, and we are obligated to report to advertisers how many people visit our site in a given week."

At Thought Market, tech entrepreneur Michael Gracie comments: "Political parties have proven they can't get technology use right, and I doubt they are going to get any decent advice anytime soon. It is therefore wishful thinking to expect these types of claims will end before our sun runs out of juice."

9/11 MEMORIAL: Forty Four? Forty, Or Fight!

Owing in part to the protests of conservative bloggers, the Flight 93 memorial in Shanksville, PA was recently redesigned to remove a crescent-shape that many felt came too close to the Islamic Crescent symbol (see our previous coverage). But the controversy may not be over yet. Error Theory: "There are still 44 translucent blocks on the flight path to the crash site, matching the total number of dead, instead of just the forty translucent blocks that are dedicated to the forty murdered Americans." Widely-read Little Green Footballs linked, giving the post wide exposure.

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: But If Norm Ornstein Licensed A "Norm Ornamentstein," That Would Be A "Holiday" Item, Right?

Considering that FNC's Bill O'Reilly and John Gibson have recently made an issue of businesses using the word "Holidays" where they once used the word "Christmas," on 11/30 a Daily Kos contributor pointed out that the FNC store sells "Holiday Ornaments." The fact was picked up by lefty media watchdog Media Matters, giving it a wider airing. Before long even conservative blogs were picking up the story, and at some point in the day, FNC changed the item description to call them "Christmas Ornaments". Dave at conservative Say Anything doesn't care what companies say: "To me, it's just capitalism in action: companies want to maximize their profits, so they avoid any statements that could detract people from going to their stores. However, regardless of how you feel, you have to love this irony." In a tongue-in-cheek post, Stop the ACLU points out that FNC's description of the item still refers to a "holiday tree": "I am hereby announcing my intent to launch a massive e-mail campaign against FOX News. The only reason I'm not calling for a boycott of their network immediately is because I already don't watch the other networks, and I do need some news to watch on TV." Liberal Moxie Grrrl, on FNC: "Apparently they believe 'Happy Holidays' doesn't include Christmas. See? I told you they were f---ing morons."

• Rep. Dennis Kucinich has posted to the Huffington Post a letter to Los Angeles Times publisher Jeffrey Johnson, signed by 2 dozen Dem House members, including 9 from CA, plus Sherrod Brown (OH), Patrick Kennedy (RI), and others. Explaining its raison d'etre, the letter begins: "We, as Members of Congress, object to the dismissal of Robert Scheer, a 32-year veteran of the LA Times with a long history of excellence in reporting and op ed pieces."

REID: Radio Daze

Following up on the recent item about Senate Min. Leader Harry Reid's comments to the effect that bin Laden might be dead, WSJ's John Fund wrote, in Reid's comments "there is a line in there of pure speculation ... but Reid used the word 'seriously" on air.' More: "The point in my piece stands. Reid is the Minority Leader and clearly left the impression he had been briefed on this matter." In posting the Fund piece, Power Line's Scott Johnson asks, "who's to check" NV analyst Jon Ralston, who 1st reported that Reid's source was NPR, not intel agencies.

We dealt with the matter yesterday in this space and as well as at Hotline On Call. That item was picked up by Daily Kos. A few of the top lefty blogs picked it up, and centrist Joe Gandelman wrote: "It sounds like some corrections might be in order here." Others may have corrected it, but one we saw was from ND conservative was Rob Port.

BLOGGER SPOTLIGHT: Kuffs

Today the Blogometer talks to lefty TX blogger Charles Kuffner, who writes Off The Kuff.

What is your full name?

Charles Kuffner

What is your age?

On the verge of 40.

Where did you grow up?

Staten Island, NY

Where do you live now?

Houston, TX

What is your occupation? Have you ever worked on a political campaign or for the mainstream media?

I do IT work for a big company. I've done a small amount of volunteer work for campaigns, but have never done any paid work for one. Unless my college newspaper counts, I have not worked for the mainstream media.

When did you start blogging and why?

January 1, 2002. I had come across a friend's blog, now known as Perverse Access Memory (though at the time it was called What She Really Thinks) and said to myself, "that looks like fun."

What has been your favorite post, or favorite story to write about, in that time?

I enjoyed writing about the Texas redistricting battle of 2003, and I enjoy doing analyses of Congressional and State Rep. districts, but I think as much as anything I got more out or writing about my experiences as a Little League coach than any of the political stuff.

Describe your typical blogging schedule. And what is your average output?

Average output is 4 to 6 posts a day. Schedule is whenever I can fit it in. I try to squeeze in as much as I can before I leave for work and before I go to bed.

Who is your favorite political blogger? Favorite non-political blogger?

Hard to pick one favorite political blogger, but I'll go with Josh Marshall. For non-political blogging, I'll pick Jay Jaffe.

Who is your favorite mainstream media columnist?

Judith Martin, a/k/a Miss Manners.

What is your favorite television news program, either network or cable?

I'm not much of a TV news watcher.

What MSM-produced websites (i.e. newspapers, magazines) do you visit on a daily basis?

Houston Chronicle, Salon, American Prospect. Other Texas newspapers (Austin American-Statesman, Dallas Morning News, San Antonio Express News, Fort Worth Star-Telegram) on a less-than-daily but more-than-weekly basis.

What non-MSM websites (i.e. blogs) do you visit on a daily basis?

Too many to list. Look at my Bloglines subscriptions and you'll see what I mean.

How often, or do you ever, read a newspaper in its dead-tree (i.e. print) form?

I subscribe to the Houston Chronicle, so every day.

How do you see the new media and old media affecting and influencing each other in the next five years?

I believe you will see more new media sites and personalities being hired by old media (see Andrew Sullivan and Time Magazine, for example). I believe old media will adapt some of features of blogging (more direct feedback on stories, for example), and will be more likely to have their own blogs, which they will come to see as adding value to their sites.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: The Wicked Wiki

At academic history blog Cliopatra, Oscar Chamberlain notes an 11/30 USA Today op-ed by veteran journalist John Seigenthaler Sr., whose Wikipedia entry insinuated -- for 1/3 of a year -- that he might have been involved with the JFK assassination.

Chamberlain comments: "I've always had mixed feelings about Wikipedia. I do use it, particularly when I want a quick summary of how some technology works. I like the way that thousands of people post and correct posts on thousands of topics simply for the love of it. I guess my 1960s roots are showing there. However, I don't allow my students to use it as a source. There's just too much room for falsehood, particularly on the controversial topics that many of them are researching. ... He's a good man who deserves much better. And Wikipedia is going to have to evolve some more creative anti-libel procedures if it wants to continue to grow and to remain both open and trustworthy."

It's worth noting that as of the present, there appears to be no Wikipedia entry for Siegenthaler, nor for the NBC corr. John Siegenthaler, his son. See also: Wikipedia entry for John Seigenthaler Sr.

LEST WE FORGET: When Contractual Obligations Prove Arduous, New Media Workers Resort To Filler

What would happen if, as the rumors say, a media company such as the New York Times bought NYC gossip blog Gawker? See Panopticist for one artist's rendering.

Posted by at December 1, 2005 11:51 AM

Copyright 2007 by National Journal Group Inc.
The Watergate · 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20037
202-739-8400 · fax 202-833-8069
NationalJournal.com is an Atlantic Media publication.