Here is the day’s laugh from Romenesko, hot and heavy, at which neighbors may be calling to see if I’m all right following my outburst:
Wall Street Journal
Many military bloggers, or "milbloggers," argue that the mainstream media tends to overplay negative war stories and play down positive developments. For many of these blogs, says one milblogger, "the sole purpose is to counteract the media." The frustration of milbloggers is understandable, says Shorenstein Center's Alex Jones. But "if the overall picture is one of continued violence and a significant lack of stability in many parts of Iraq, the individual shards of good news could be more of a distortion than a reflection of the truth."Posted at 9:47:41 AM
Italics added, if you please, to this super-ivory-tower comment from the Shorenstein man. Pray tell, where the hell would newspapers be without “individual shards”? It’s the mother’s milk of sales nourishment, for crying out loud.
Moreover, does he really think papers give the “overall picture”? As in booming economy with pockets of poverty, when the latter are drummed home Alinsky-like to rub raw the sores of discontent?
What does he think editors do more of, induction (gathering of facts and then deciding) or deduction (picking facts based on embracing the generality)?