Zero Impact

The folks at ABC News may have needed something to smile about after the critical reaction to their debate performance.  if so, this letter from "journalists", as The Nation calls it, must have brightened their day.  Their intro:

Journalists Slam ABC Debate Tactics

In an open letter to ABC, journalists and media analysts condemn the network's poor handling of the April 16 Democratic presidential debate.

It's a long list of signatures, but there are precious few of what would normally be considered actual journalists, and many, many left wing bloggers and advocates passing themselves, for today's purposes, as "media analysts".

Names after the break - count 'em yourself if you like.

No word on where to send money or crying towels.

Spencer Ackerman, The Washington Independent
Eric Alterman, City University of New York
Dean Baker, The American Prospect Online
Steven Benen, The Carpetbagger Report
Julie Bergman Sender, Balcony Films
Ari Berman, The Nation
Brian Beutler, The Media Consortium
Michael Berube, Crooked Timber, the University of Pennsylvania
Joel Bleifuss, In These Times
Sam Boyd, The American Prospect
Lakshmi Chaudry, In These Times
Joe Conason, Journalist and Author
Brad DeLong, Brad DeLong's Semi-Daily Journal and UC Berkeley
Kevin Drum, The Washington Monthly
Henry Farrell, Crooked Timber, George Washington University
James Galbraith, University of Texas at Austin
Todd Gitlin, Columbia University, TPM Cafe
Merrill Goozner (formerly Chicago Tribune)
Ilan Goldenberg, The National Security Network
Robert Greenwald, Brave New Films
Christopher Hayes, The Nation
Don Hazen, Alternet
Michael Kazin, Georgetown University
Ed Kilgore, The Democratic Strategist
Richard Kim, The Nation
Ezra Klein, The American Prospect
Mark Kleiman, UCLA/The Reality Based Community
Scott McLemee, Inside Higher Ed
Ari Melber, The Nation
Rick Perlstein, Campaign for America's Future
Katha Pollitt, The Nation
David Roberts, Grist
Thomas Schaller, Columnist, The Baltimore Sun
Mark Schmitt, The New America Foundation
Adele Stan, The Media Consortium
Jonathan Stein, Mother Jones Magazine
Mark Thoma, The Economist's View
Michael Tomasky, The Guardian
Cenk Uygur, The Young Turks
Tracy Van Slyke, The Media Consortium
Kai Wright, The Root

Comments

[clarice]

HEH!Some list of heavy hitters.

(I thought you were gardening. )

[Enlightened]

Bwaaahhhhahahah. I am certain ABC is just quaking in their boots I tell ya.

OTOH, looks like some biggies are missing - weren't they invited to the signing party?

Ellensburg/Ellers/Greenwald?
Moron.org?
Markos "Screw'em"?
Joshua Micah?????

Someone has some 'splainin to do.

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

Some people take themselves waaaay too seriously.

The only specific gripe is about the capital gains tax question--which IS a policy issue--and Obama agreed with Gibson.

[centralcal]

The people at The Nation are journalists? Who knew!

[JH]

WTO says the US needs to 'be careful what it's asking for' I'll take all the money, but I won't work.

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

Here's John Lott giving us a reason not to ask questions on policy. The answer will probably be a lie:

In fact, I knew Obama during the mid-1990s, and his answers to [Independent Voters of Illinois]’s question on guns fit well with the Obama that I knew. Indeed, the first time I introduced myself to him he said “Oh, you are the gun guy.”

I responded “Yes, I guess so.” He simply responded that “I don’t believe that people should be able to own guns.”

When I said it might be fun to talk about the question sometime and about his support of the city of Chicago’s lawsuit against the gun makers, he simply grimaced and turned away, ending the conversation.

If taken literally, Obama’s statement to me was closer to what the IL State Legislative National Political Awareness Test found, indicating that Obama's bans would extend well beyond handguns.

[Mary Rosh]

John Lott is brilliant. He's more brillianter than all those journamalists put together, and I trust his account of Obama completely.

[Daddy]

Awww, they're just bitter.

You go into some of these small irrelevant news organs across the country, and their relevance has been gone now for 25 years and nothings replaced them. And their relevance fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each succesive administration has said that somehow these irrelevant news organs are going to regenerate and they have not. So it's not surprising then, that they get bitter, they cling to modems or Das Kapital or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-War sentiment or anti-American sentiment as a way to express their frustrations.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Brad DeLong?

[pagar]

"“I don’t believe that people should be able to own guns.”

I can't believe that the leaders of the Democrats think Obama can win a Presidential election.

[GMax]

Heck why didnt they post the entire masthead of the Nation? Do they have more than three employees? Who reads the rag anyway? Even Mother Jones probably has more readers than the pitiful little socialist workers rag.

[pagar]

I read the list, is there a section missing, the one that lists the journalists?

[Komisar]

The quaking is usual when the Pope talks to the UN. Lucifer gets mad - bitter.

It's like everywhere Bill went someone got shot. Gun hater.

Those blogs are losers.

[Daddy]

"A journalist is a reporter who is out of a job." Mark Twain.

[lonetown]

Its amazing how transparent they are in their zeal to stifle any contrary opinions and control every aspect of their vision.

"Journalism" left itself open to this by its failure to act as an ethical profession.

People don't know what to believe.

Clearly these groups and individuals DID influence other debate questions. How about CNN's plants debate.

Journalism is done. It does not exist.

[Scott Meyer]

Who are these people? I may have seen articles by two of them. Maybe.

[BD57]

Reads like the roster of speakers at the International Blowhards Convention.