A Complete Rat Bastard Plaguing Our Wire Services

No, it's not McCain.

Although he is a complete rat bastard, and he does plague the news with lie after lie after histrionic fit, he's not the man I have in mind.

But you're close - this fucktard nearly joined the McCain campaign officially. He certainly seems on board clandestinely.

You all recall this spectacle just after news of Obama's VP selection broke:

I'm sure I don't have to point out there's a wee bit o' bias there.

The biased ratfucker is none other than the AP's very own Washington bureau chief:

The latest piece from Ron Fournier, the AP's Washington bureau chief and the man responsible for directing the wire service's coverage of the presidential campaign, on Joe Biden joining the Democratic ticket, is drawing a fair amount of attention this morning. More importantly, McCain campaign staffers are pushing it fairly aggressively to other reporters, in large part because it mirrors the Republican line with minimal variation.

That would probably be because Fournier loves McCain enough to bring him donuts with sprinkles, and Obama - not so much.

Steve Benen, former Carpetbagger and now Political Animal, has a catalogue of the the unapologetically biased "news" flying from the AP's wires. A sampling:

In March, for example, Fournier wrote an item -- whether it was a news article or an opinion piece was unclear -- that said Barack Obama is "bordering on arrogance," "a bit too cocky," and that the senator and his wife "ooze a sense of entitlement." To substantiate the criticism, Fournier pointed to ... not a whole lot. It was basically the Republicans' "uppity" talking point in the form of an AP article.

[snip]

When Obama unveiled his faith-based plan, the AP got the story backwards. When Obama talked about his Iraq policy on July 3, the AP said he'd "opened the door" to reversing course, even though he hadn't.

The AP's David Espo wrote a hagiographic, 1,200-word piece, praising McCain's "singular brand of combative bipartisanship," which was utterly ridiculous.

[snip]

The AP flubbed the story on McCain joking about killing Iranians, and then flubbed the story about McCain's promise to eliminate the deficit. It's part of a very discouraging trend for the AP that's been ongoing throughout the campaign.

And then, within hours of Obama announcing his running mate, there's Fournier again, writing up another piece -- whether it's a news article or an opinion piece is, again, unclear -- that the McCain campaign just loves.

The AP has slipped from being a source of news and has become, like so many other "news" outlets, a discount superstore for Republicon talking points.

I feel I need to say something here.

When the progressive blogosphere was pounding the traditional news sources for becoming stenographers, excoriating them for their "he said, she said, we're just repeating what we were told" style of "reporting," we did not mean that the news media should overcorrect and start spewing their personal opinions all over news stories.

What we meant was, you should stop being uncritical mouthpieces and engage in actual journalism.

It appears that we shall have to define this term, as the fucktards who style themselves "journalists" have no idea what it means.

They seem to have been deceived by the fact that "journalism" is similar to the word "journal." A journal, as we know, often refers to something akin to a private diary, in which thoughts and opinions are written down.

This is not to be confused for journalism, which is the act of not only reporting what you're told, but verifying that it's true.

Merriam Webster's online dictionary tells us that journalism is "writing characterized by a direct presentation of facts or description of events without an attempt at interpretation." The key words are "facts" and "without an attempt at interpretation."

This is stenography: "Bush says there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq."

This is journalism: "Bush says there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. However, several important sources within the intelligence community dispute this. Evidence supports their conclusion."

Going on to state baldly, "I therefore believe the President is a lying sack of shit" may be accurate, but is not journalism. That is what we might call an "editorial." It belongs on the editorial pages, not the fucking wire services.

What Ratfucker Ronnie is doing is presenting editorials as news items. He's encouraging his "reporters" to do the same. Since many news outlets rely on the wire services for all but the most local of news, many consumers of news are getting opinion pieces presented as objective news.

If this gets as far up your nose as it does mine, the incomparable Jane Hamsher has a delightful little tool for registering your displeasure.

Let's all be Pipers and get this rat out of town, shall we, my darlings?