Monday, February 20, 2006

Coining a New Term: First There Was the MSM Now There Is the MSBS

Coining a New Term: First There Was the MSM Now There Is the MSBS

First there was the MSM (the Mainstream Media).  This dinosaur has been virtually supplanted by the MSBS (Mainstream Blogospshere), to include the like so of Michelle Malkin, Glenn Reynolds, John Hinderaker, Charles Johnson – and the King Kong of them all, Hugh Hewitt.

Now, however, while the MSBS is still light years ahead of the CNN/CBS/NYT trogdolytes, we have seen the first hints of the unfortunate “normalization” or “institutionalization” or even, possibly, the “ossification” of this newer and younger group of young lions by the founding of the (unfortunately-named) “Pajamas Media.”

We even see some of the new media barons assuming a bit of the arrogance of their fallen MSM foes.

Case in point: I just skimmed Hugh Hewitt’s blog for ANY mention of the port security flap (dubbed “Port Gate” by talk-show host Michael Savage) since February 16th – and nada!  Not one syllable expended.

So, Hugh, you are now doing to us what the Rathers and Jenningses used to do – simply ignoring issues that were of major concern to the grassroots, as if their detached unconcern could make them disappear.

I have little doubt that Mr. Hewitt comes down squarely behind President Bush’s ill-considered (and Dhimmi-like) defense of the CIFIUS decision to award control of six of our major ports to a company headquartered in Dubai – a shitty little country that whelped at least one or two of the 9-11 perpetrators.

The least Mr. Hewitt could do would be to acknowledge that this is an issue of major concern to many – and then to give his reasons for his agreement with the President’s indefensible position.

Instead, Mr. Hewitt is making like CBS of old – and giving the issue the silent treatment . . . . As if to say, it isn’t an important issue because HE doesn’t consider it important.

For that, I consider myself to be part of the “third rail” of the media – the small, rogue bloggers, who kowtow to no one’s alleged PJesque supremacy.

I say: Get in their faces.

Shame on Mr. Hewitt for deep-sixing the Port Gate issue.

It is not to his credit whatsoever to give this issue the silent treatment.

Update:  Jerome Corsi presents more reasons why this lunatic idea must be stopped dead in its tracks – Presidential testimonies to the contrary notwithstanding.

Update: It NEEDS to be said that Michelle Malkin and lgf (Pajamas Media members both) have each made clear stands AGAINST the Port Security deal that President Bush appears to be lusting after.


Blogger BostonMaggie said...

You are not going to stop this deal. I agree it requires further scrutiny and controls ave to be placed on this. But the fact remains that no American company is interested. the alternative is a company from Singapore.
Also, Dubai isn't's fabulous!

Tue Feb 21, 06:59:00 AM PST  
Blogger GunJam said...

bostonmaggie: Don't speak too soon! The fight isn't over, yet. Dubai is shitty -- even if its streets are paved with gold! -- gunjam

Tue Feb 21, 04:34:00 PM PST  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

# # # # #