Time’s Joe Klein has been clashing with bloggers, mostly progressive ones, and at times the exchanges have not been pretty. In a post called “Beware The Bloggers Bile,” he recounts a recent case where he was actually given bad information by a source, then lambasted for it by some progressive bloggers, called names, etc.
His main point is this:
First, let me say that I really enjoy blogging. It’s a brilliant format for keeping readers up to date on the things I care about—and for exchanging information with them….. Furthermore, I’ve found that some great reporting takes place in the blogosphere: Juan Cole’s Iraq updates are invaluable, Joshua Micah Marshall’s Talking Points Memo did serious muckraking about the U.S. attorneys scandal, and Ezra Klein (no relation) is excellent on health care. I love linking to smart work by others, something you just can’t do in a print column.
You have to also note that there are thoughtful bloggers in the center and on the right. Or people who are highly passionate on the left, right and center and make no bones about policies they prefer or candidates who they may increasingly favor.
Original reporting? It’s done by blogs of varying viewpoints. Here are just a few: Michael Totten, Crooks and Liars, The Talking Dog, Dean Esmay. And TMV. It’s not limited to one part of the blogosphere. MORE:
But the smart stuff is being drowned out by a fierce, bullying, often witless tone of intolerance that has overtaken the left-wing sector of the blogosphere. Anyone who doesn’t move in lockstep with the most extreme voices is savaged and ridiculed—especially people like me who often agree with the liberal position but sometimes disagree and are therefore considered traitorously unreliable. Some of this is understandable: the left-liberals in the blogosphere are merely aping the odious, disdainful—and politically successful—tone that right-wing radio talk-show hosts like Rush Limbaugh pioneered. They are also justifiably furious at a Bush White House that has specialized in big lies and smear tactics.
But a tone of “intolerance” in blogging is NOT limited to the left.
Anyone who has the time can go down our categorized blogroll and read RIGHT VOICES, CENTER VOICES, LEFT VOICES and even some OTHER VOICES and find a lot of extremely angry voices and some that don’t seem tolerant of people who don’t totally agree with them.
To a certain extent, blogging involves a free association of ideas (smart ones and dumb ones — perhaps as this post proves..) And some voices on both sides that sound like what you may have heard on a conservative or progressive talk radio show the day before (that’s why talk radio hosts of the left and right have incredible power because they keep the faithful faithful and in sync with the operative “group think”).
There have been several big issues over the past few years where both left and right blogs have come under fire for tough talk and mobilizing readers against someone, some issue or some party. Both the left and right sides of the blogosphere have come under fire from the mainstream media (which first detested blogs and now and is now taking an “if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em” attitude).There is nothing intrinsically wrong with that. It’s part of the immediacy and honest nature of blogging. MORE:
And that is precisely the danger here. Fury begets fury. Poison from the right-wing talk shows seeped into the Republican Party’s bloodstream and sent that party off the deep end. Limbaugh’s show—where Dick Cheney frequently expatiates—has become the voice of the Republican establishment. The same could happen to the Democrats. The spitballs aimed at me don’t matter much. The spitballs aimed at Harman, Clinton and Obama are another story. Despite their votes, each of those politicians believes the war must be funded. (Obama even said so in his statement explaining his vote.) Each knows, as Senator Jim Webb has said repeatedly, that we must be more careful getting out of Iraq than we were getting in. But they allowed themselves to be bullied into a more simplistic, more extreme position. Why? Partly because they fear the power of the bloggers to set the debate and raise money against them. They may be right—in the short (primary election) term; Harman faced a challenge from the left in 2006. In the long term, however, kowtowing to extremists is exactly the opposite of what this country is looking for after the lethal radicalism of the Bush Administration.
But, again, it is not just the left.
Republican candidates also seem influenced by what is raging (and blogs ALWAYS RAGE) on blogs. It’s the nature of the new relationships between the media, politicos, government officials with messages to deliver, and bloggers.
Klein is correct on one point. There is far less of a tendency now to discuss things in a way that might win over a foe or change their mind than go after them. But this is not limited to the left.
The days of aggregating interests in politics are seemingly being replaced by a new day and culture of aggravating interests. The days of “Come let us reason together” have been replaced by “Go Cheney/McCain yourself.”
One sign of the influence of blogs we have noted here. Many candidates hold conference calls with bloggers. The bloggers then do posts which are usually but not always favorable.
It’s an old rule that giving a journalist access is better than denying them access, which can make them angry and mean tougher coverage. As a reporter, my editors used to raise eyebrows when an official refused to call me back for a story. The other side was reported with a “so and so did not respond to calls for comment.” It never looks good.
It’s not just blogs on the left that have influence and are the targets of those who seek to influence them.
In the past few weeks John McCain and Rudy Giuliani had conference calls with bloggers. In nearly four years this site has never been invited to any major candidate or Congressional official conference call. And one coblogger here has indeed been in touch with various candidates for several months. Why is TMV deemed unworthy of being invited by people who seemingly might benefit from some get centrist or independent votes? Our voices here are diverse so it’s likely we are perceived as not being as likely to deliver the message they want to deliver — which is in fact correct since TMV as a site does not endorse candidates and our cobloggers (who may favor differing candidates) are likely to ask tough questions.
The point is: candidates KNOW blogs are influential now and are trying to cozy up to those that they feel might help them deliver their message (and as we see on TMV avoid those who might be a bit more skeptical or not offer a totally cohesive ideological voice on their sites).
Is it because the candidates view weblogs as homes for CSPAN-like cerebral discussion? Or because they hope to TAP the passion, rage and activist inclinations of many bloggers — and blog readers? (The fallacy here is that these candidates have all written off the center, apparently which will rightfully mean they will have a tougher sell to the center in the elections since their bonds to centrist weblogs are virtually nil at this point).
Klein DOES have a point: our entire political discourse, and the way young people think politics should be discussed, is now influenced by the late 20th century growth of angry and confrontational talk radio and the old Crossfire TV culture where anger, people talking over each other, shouting and name calling is good radio and good TV. A good argument can be made by some that this is actually a good development, since since citizen political involvement has been greatly increased by politics become the Professional Wrestling of the radio and cable networks.
Project the present trend and tone of the trend in our present political discussion. It seemingly gets angrier, more confrontational with each year.
What will it be like in 5 or 10 years if the trend continues, particularly with young people being raised to think this is how political discussions should be conducted? On the other hand, some will argue that the issues are now so stark an sharply defined on the left and right that pull-out-all-stops tactics are justifiable or even necessary. It can be argued each way (and we argue it a certain way here — see our Mission Statement on the right side of the template).
Even so, as CBS’s former anchor Walter Cronkite said: “That’s the way it is.”
And bloggers, candidates and journalists who are seemingly fighting rear-action battles to keep things the way they were or roll the clock back will be disappointed. There IS a new media mix and political cultural style in America. The U.S. isn’t going to go back to the 50s, 60s, or 70s.
So the anger, rage and tone problem is not limited to just the left. It’s on the right. Al Gore’s new book offers pages of specific instances. You can also see it on the center (in November co-bloggers here were at war with each other for a while). These are angry times where many voters — particularly those who were not part of the “base” during an era of an administration that had government of the base, by the base and for the base — feel shut out. Those in the center often are targets of anger — rejected by the right (for being too much to the left) and by the left (for being too right). Or for being wusses who won’t definitely join one side.
Changing a position is considered untrustworthy (unless you’re Mitt Romney).
So there is anger and name calling on the left, right and in the center.
And, honestly: to each his own.
But it is a new era.
And that’s the way it is.
SOME OTHER THOUGHTS ON KLEIN: TPM Cafe, Talk Left, David Frum, Hot Air, Tbogg, Right Wing Nuthouse, The Impolitic, QandO, Shakesville, Hogan’s Alley, 24th State, Scottish Right, Mick Stockinger Booman (who has a letter to Klein)
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.