home

On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers

Kevin Drum has a thoughtful piece on the politics of personal destruction ongoing in the blogosphere. I agree with his hope that scalp-collecting does not become the primary focus of blogs on either side, and I believe that it won't. It's already become tiresome and completely predictable. There's so much more to the blogosphere than "we got Eason" vs. "we got Gannon."

Yet, Digby makes a good point in noting that the left will never match the right when it comes to resources for causing destruction:

Remember Webb Hubbell, Bernie Nussbaum, Mike Espy, Henry Cisneros, Roger Altman blah, blah, blah? And let's not forget that they spent 70 million taxpayer dollars trying to hound Clinton out of office. He just refused to go. The only difference now is that the target is the long-hated liberal media and bloggers have joined the assassination squad.

If liberal bloggers' record of scalps is Trent Lott losing the leadership post that Bush wanted him out of anyway then we aren't even in the same league. The Right Wing Noise machine is a group of seasoned professionals made up of bloggers, newspapers, FOX, talk radio, and a direct pipeline to powerful Republicans in the government. We are Kos and Atrios et al. We are not equivalent.

I would add right-wing think tanks, evangelicals and paid political talking heads to the group. Eventually, the "scroll" and "delete" buttons will become the equivalent of the tv "mute" button, and the Right will be left reading themselves and preaching to the choir.

The left-leaning media, including bloggers, being more focused on issues, injustices and fund-raising for Democrats, will gain new followers through netroots activism. Ultimately, the right will be reduced to wallowing in its own slime.

Update: Instapundit weighs in on the scalp-collecting issue:

....it was the stuff about Gannon's personal life that led to his resignation, and that there's something rather sleazy about that. Backstage or not, targeting parts of people's lives that don't have to do with the story -- like, say, Eason Jordan's love life -- seems inappropriate to me, and likely to lend support to the bloggers-as-lynch-mob caricature.

I made a similar comment about the Gannon outing here . Whether the guy had access to secret documents about Valerie Plame is a legitimate issue and should be investigated by Congress as well as the mainstream media. Speculation about his sex life, and trying to justify airing it on the basis that maybe he committed or endorsed prostitution because of domain names he bought, is not.

< Specter's Strategy for Judicial Nominees | Florida Moves to Compensate the Wrongly Convicted >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 10:56:04 AM EST
    I only wish that day- the wallowing in its own slime- would make haste!

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 11:40:09 AM EST
    No dice, TL. The left is it's own undoing. The right isn't destroying, the left is self-destructing. The right merely point out what's plain for everyone to see. Re-read that Digby sidebar and substitute "we" for every "you" in it and see if it doesn't describe the left perfectly.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 11:45:07 AM EST
    But... the guy admitted he was working under a false name, which was forbidden to the rest of the press core, and refused to reveal his actual identity. So, people went looking to find out who "Jeff Gannon" was, and realized right off the bat that the person who owned the domain name also owned several porn/escort sounding domains. Domain registrations are PUBLIC RECORDS, not secret or private. Why is there all of this boo-hooing about disrupting his private life, when all that has been revealed about "Gannon" has been found through search engines? I don't know what the expectation of privacy of semi-public people is, but most people I know google someone before going out on a date. And while he's off complaining about his privacy, the people looking into his life don't even know if he's married or has kids. He's talking about his family being followed to church, when his real name wasn't known until late Monday night. And although he claims the adult sites were for "clients," he provides no names or even business names. This is a classic example of Republican admit-no-wrong-turn-the-blame-elsewhere. What would have happened if anyone given a pass to the Clinton White House had business/financial dealings with a gay military prostitution/porn anything?

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 12:11:32 PM EST
    Maureen - The chief complaint was that he was working for a small outfit and asked only softball questions. I guess all of the complainers missed the Clintion years and CNN. But no matter, while they complain about that, we have a non-reporter, Helen Thomas, being lauded.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 12:12:09 PM EST
    Well, Hubbell wound up in prison and Clinton could have stopped it all by just initally saying: Yes I did. And Espy and Cisneros were, if nothing else, guilty of Trent Lott size lapses in good judgement. And for the Mother Of All Politics Of Personal Destruction, I give you The Texas Air National Guard and Bush, or how the Left help defeat John Kerry by opening up a battle they could not win. And then we really shouldn't be forgetting, "Rathergate," aka "An Attack Too Far." As to "Ultimately," I am reminded that, in the long run, we will all be dead. I also remember when the Democratic Party was for things, and when it was the Repblicians who were against things.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#6)
    by Pete Guither on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 01:12:22 PM EST
    PPJ, No, the chief complaint was that somebody working for a fake organization, with no journalism credentials, who had been turned down for credientials on the Hill, was allowed access to the President and to classified documents, and was allowed to act as a White House press reporter on a day pass for two years (although that is expressly forbidden) using a pseudonym.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 03:19:47 PM EST
    Pete - I don't think Talon is a fake organization. And if we are to worry about private funding, moveon and Air Amerrica will have to close up shop. And I express no love for Gannon, but his only sin that I see is using a fake name. But if we are really concerned about there being actual reporters there, then Helen Thomas has to go. She is now a columnist, writing opinion pieces. And, of course, no blogger could ever attend. As for a truce, I don't see one as long as the Repubs see themselves trading a Gannon for a Jordan, with expectations of a Churchill by the end of the month. Of course both sides could cut their losses by having their people learn to not say and do outrageous things. Hubris is an equal opportunity disease.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#8)
    by cp on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 03:23:40 PM EST
    the left will never compare to the right in the arena of the politics of personal destruction, we haven't the stomach for it, it is.........unseemly. a factor which doesn't concern the right, because they are thematically dull and morally bankrupt. gannon was "outed" on a number of levels: fake name; fake credentials; hypocrisy; printing, verbatim, white house news releases, without attribution, etc. his obvious support for the anti-gay agenda of the administration opened the door to his own destruction. the old "those who live in glass houses........" warning. i don't believe for a minute he was stalked, threatened, etc., absent concrete proof to that effect. so, far, that proof has not been forthcoming. no police reports, no witnesses, save himself, no nothing to substantiate his "victimhood". gannon, guckert, whatever your name is, here's a quarter, go call someone who cares.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 03:58:37 PM EST
    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 04:17:50 PM EST
    majowa - "Commonly referred to as “The First Lady of the Press,” " And Babe Ruth is called the king os swat, but he doesn't play anymore. My point remains. Helen Thomas is no longer a reporter. So if that is important... bye bye Helen!

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 04:21:04 PM EST
    Think Babe Ruth doesn't play anymore because he's dead?

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 04:23:54 PM EST
    Portraying Jordan as a leftist whose cause we should back is a joke. He is just another fat cat. Gannon/Guckert is just another Bush pawn - there are lots more where he came from. Why should we care one way or another about either? This is not sculp-collecting, it's a sideshow. Anyone who considers themselves a leftist should ignore this circus and focus on something real.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 04:51:02 PM EST
    Peter is right. And, I would suggest that anyone who wants to question Helen Thomas's credentials versus Mr. Gannon's, doesn’t' know much about the history of the White House press, and/or what a journalist is. So, just how did Gannon get access to that classified CIA document exposing Valerie Plame? Has Helen, of Hurst (not a faux news outlet), done something like that? I think not. This is a propaganda scandal.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 05:02:33 PM EST
    There are a lot more Rathers and Jordans on the left to be exposed than there are Gannons on the right. Keep in mind, Rather and Jordan represent the biggest and most influential news organizations in this country. They are supposed to bring people an un-biased account the what is happening in the world. It is more of a story when a supposedly impartial media person has been exposed favoring one side, even cheating to help that side win. The left finds itself having to defend or at least allied with the likes of Ward Churchill and Eason Jordan, which is why the right will win in the "scalp taking" contest. The left is vulnerable because of those they are aligned with. The used car salesman mentality of the left gets it in trouble and was a big part of why middle America voted for the Republicans in these serious times. Why is Eason Jordan automatically associated with the left anyway? Cuz he is a CNN exec? I thought CNN was an unbiased news organization. Is it cuz he is anti-military? I thought the left supported the troops just as much as the right.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 05:18:36 PM EST
    HenryJ - Do I think you got my point? Yes, you did. Tuli - Don't be obtuse. The issue is not "credentials," but whether or not a "non-reporter" should be at the press briefing. If you think Gannon was a non-reporter, and shouldn't have been there, then you have to admit that Helen Thomas is no longer a reporter and shouldn't be there. i.e. Reporters report news. They don't write columns. Helen writes a column.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 05:50:34 PM EST
    On NPR yesterday they had a guy from the White House Pres Corp (missed his name) who said that a large number of journalists use their "broadcast names" rather than their full names. His example was something like "Susan James" whose real name was "Susan James Blovanovich." He also mentioned numerous female reporters using their maiden names rather than their married names. Sorta like Hilary Rodham and Teresa Heintz. -C

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 06:35:07 PM EST
    The Liberal Blogs: All Dressed Up, But No Place To Go The liberal blogs (Talk Left, Kos, Atrios, et. al.) got Gannon, a whitehouse plant asking softball questions. Meanwhile, the conservative blogs got Eason Jordan, Betsy West, Josh Howard, Mary Murphy, Mary Mapes, and Dan Rather, just to name a few. While the liberal blogs are curled up under the porch, licking their wounds, the conservative blogs are dancing a jig. At best, the liberal blogs are the wallflowers at the dance. Why is this?

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#18)
    by glanton on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 07:37:51 PM EST
    Anonymous and all others who stupidly continue to prate on about eh "embarrasingly liberal media," pray tell: Why is it that you can never find a telecast or a major newspaper campaign involving the nuts and bolts of the health care crisis? Why is it that so very many thought there were Iraqi nationals on the planes in 9/11? Why is it that education is never a major aspect of the national media discourse, unless framed by Dubya's reptillian NCLB? If the media is so damned liberal why did they do such an effective job pimping the invasion of Iraq before it happened? "Oh," you protest, "but they never communicate all the good things we're doing in Iraq." Baloney, and who cares? You got your bloodbath and you'll get another if Dubya decides to go for it. Meanwhile no aspect of liberal politics at home or abroad gets any media play whatever. Except on a few blogs.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#19)
    by glanton on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 07:42:15 PM EST
    Oh, and don't forget all the attention Ward Churchill has been getting while scumsucker redneck Mattis slinks under the radar after a day of mamby-pamby reporting. And all the play about gay marriage, how destructive it is to whatever. And "partial birth abortion" (yeah, right), and all this God talk. Yeah, the American media really is a hair's breath away from Trotsky....

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#20)
    by Adept Havelock on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 08:45:40 PM EST
    -Glanton Well said.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 09:48:33 PM EST
    Don't forget what happened to Trotsky. He was killed with an ice pick in his office in Mexico City. What's your point, Glanton?

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 13, 2005 at 11:37:28 PM EST
    It is to laugh at all the right-winger 'conservatives' posting here. They're complaining about what was found through simple search engines about a liar who pretended to be something he was not. And given the context he was caught in at a time when this adminstration has been caught not once, not twice, but three times so far using propaganda paid for by taxpayer dollars, the right has NO GROUNDS on which to sqawk. And given Gannon's anti-gay stance, him being outed as a gay whore is just icing on the cake. Rush and Oreily have a new friend in their 'do as I say, not as I do" club. When will the right wake up to the stench of its own hypocrisy?

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 01:19:39 AM EST
    He also mentioned numerous female reporters using their maiden names rather than their married names. Sorta like Hilary Rodham and Teresa Heintz. So, what's Jeff Gannon's maiden name? Or were you just foolishly comparing apples with oranges?

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 02:00:41 AM EST
    The really sad thing is George's policies are so abysmally bad for Americans, Rove thinks it's not enough to have Timmy Russert selling them each week. They actually needed to create thier own government sponsored propaganda arm. We really have turned RED, comrades.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 05:07:45 AM EST
    glanton - For someone who won't fight, you sure attack those who will. And I'd still pay money to watch you say that to the General's face. Somehow I don't think you have the balls to do it. So question time. Why do you say such things? It makes you appear juvenile. You embarass yourself. And newspapers and TV NEWS report the news, or at least they are supposed to, with opinion pieces confined to the editorial pages and talking heads. i.e. Helen Thomas is no longer a Reporter, she now does opinion pieces. O'Reilly and Rush are not Reporters, they do opinion pieces, as does Larry King, Hannity and Combs, Michele Malkin and a host of others.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#26)
    by glanton on Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 05:58:20 AM EST
    PPJ: As I have said before it would be very easy to say what I have said "to the General's face." He is what he is. And the fact that his atrocious statement got only a blip of publicity while Churchill, a Professor of Ethnic Studies, has become a media center of gravity, is telling. "And newspapers and TV NEWS report the news." Yeah, except there's the age-old problem of who decides what's news. Apparently things like the health care crisis and education and homelesness are not news at all, while God, Guns, and Gays are all the rage, and everyone knows they sell the most papers and get the highest ratings when they pimp warfare. Ever hear of Framing, Jim? If you know what it is, you know the media is a lot of things, but liberal aint one of em.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 07:13:30 AM EST
    What I find disturbing is how quickly the "scalped" righties tend to collapse, and claim that it was "invasion of privacy" that drove them out. Take Gannon/Guckert, for example: although the dKossacks and other leftie blogs made his fake identity the major point, Right Blogistan was busy bemoaning the fact that the poor guy's private life was being exposed, even though that wasn't the case. Nobody suggested that he was gay, or that he collected gay porn (well, maybe a few overexcited commenters, but none of the blogwriters or diarists I've seen), but that he was a money-grubber that was possibly a big hypocrite as well. It reminds me a lot of Bernie wossname, the guy Bush originally wanted to take over Nightwatch, er, Homeland Security...

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#28)
    by glanton on Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 07:20:17 AM EST
    Regarding Gannon: Who cares, really, that he doesn;t have 'good' credentials, or that he's gay or a hypocrite or whatever? Same with Helen Thomas? Get rid of them all, keep them all, it's all the same to me, and you can bet your bottom dollar it's all the same in terms of what news we get. As if Peter King or Jim angle et al ask McClellan or Dubya questions that much different from the ones Gannon lobs at them. As if Helen Thomas has an impact anywhere except the extent to which she;s occasionally parodied on Saturday Night Live. As if there's any tough scrutiny at all out there. We ought to drop this charade that the MSM holds public officials acountable. 'Oh, oh, that Gannon, he's a stooge, he must be exposed!' Big freakin deal.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#29)
    by kdog on Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 09:06:05 AM EST
    I hear ya glanton, the whole white house press corps is worthless, more worried about maintaining their credentials (and lifestyle) than asking tough questions. No one has asked Bush a tough question in 5 years. That being said, the fact that the White House needed to plant an "inside guy" is even harder to fathom. How much more of a cake walk do they want?
    which is why the right will win in the "scalp taking" contest
    Typical of a repub. Capt. Toke... right and wrong, justice, truth...all secondary to "winning" eh?

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#30)
    by glanton on Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 03:53:51 PM EST
    kdog: The issue goes even deeper than that. I mean, I suppose one could demonstrate that Dubya has encountered a few "tough" questions in the past five years. It all depends on how you define "tough." Overall, though, I don't see how anyone could conclude that he's had an even moderately tough go of it with the press. But again, beyond that is how sickening it is that on the one hand, conservatives here and across the natiopn accuse the media of bneing drenched in liberal politics, and on the other, you never see the media frame liberal causes in a high profile position. Health care and education continue to stand as my two big examples, though you could easily throw in labor, alteratives to GOP foreign policy, the environment, you name it. What we get is what sells, and apparently what sells is tabloid journalism. Stuff about God, guns, and gays, as an honest man once said.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 04:49:17 PM EST
    glanton - What you need for news is a "definning event." What do you think the local paper will do, run a story: "Glanton concerned over health care" No one would care. News is a business, and if it doesn't make a profit, it's toast. And before you condem that, think of having the government run it.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#32)
    by glanton on Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 04:56:15 PM EST
    PPJ: That made me laugh out loud. "Glanton concerend over health care." Good stuff. More seriously, though, a crisis like health care is so huge is certainly merits news coverage on a grand scale, but there's never going to be a defining event for it, unless they go after some lawyer or something. So I guess liberal politics are just anathema to the profit-driven media. Which is what I'd already said. Which is why you're only being ridiculous if you act as though the media communicates liberal politics. Get the point?

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#33)
    by kdog on Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 07:53:09 PM EST
    The gov't is no help. It seems they frame the debate more so than the press. For example, it's been said that Medicare is in a lot worse financial shape than Soc. Security, why reform Social Security first? Is it the press ignoring the health care issue, or the gov't framing the debate with hot-button SS reform? My guess, a mix of the two.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Feb 15, 2005 at 06:24:34 AM EST
    glanton - A large part of the health care crisis was the cost of Rx drugs for seniors. The Left did nothing. Bush fixed it. What say you, glanton? If the Left wants to reform health care, someything I think we need to do, why aren't they pushing the issue? I see them all the time arguing over the WOT, who's going to be head of the party, Bush's TANG service, Kerry's service, whose fault N korea is, (Clinton) and a hundred other points that interest only other lefties. I remember when Democrats were people who were for something. A few still are. But the party is now just against things. Why don't you declare yourself a social liberal, like me, and register as an independent? The Demos don't desreve you. Maybe if the keep losing members they will refocus their activities.

    Re: On Scalp-Collecting Bloggers (none / 0) (#35)
    by soccerdad on Tue Feb 15, 2005 at 06:51:56 AM EST
    In the first place Bush hasn't fixed anything. The program has many problems and is ultimately way too expensive. Bush in an effort to protect Big Pharma's profits agreed that medicare could not use its size to negotiate for lower prices. So much for free enterprise. The expected cost of the drug benefit alone is 3x that for SS, yet PPJ wants SS scrapped and loves the drug benefit. Anyway, this is a financial time bomb waiting to go off and does nothing to help all the people without health insurance. But I believe this is a machevellian way to kill off the program, swell it up and then when the deficit hasn't gone down and the costs for the drug benefit are way out of contoll it will be easier to take an axe to it. The Repubs like Regean have always hated the Medicare program The position ofwhy don't the Dems do something is laughable beyond words sincethey don't have any power. Moderate Repubs are forced to go along with the Bush "my way or the highway" managerial style. Besides its the Repubs party they have all the power they should take all the heat when this house of cards comes tumbling down.