Singleton, CNN and Triangulating Blogs

Dick Morris re-defined triangulation relative to Bill Clinton:

A political strategy associated with President Bill Clinton that involves pitting two polar extremes against one another while staking a claim in the middle. The strategy was devised and expounded by presidential advisor Dick Morris.

Recently I've been thinking about the concept of triangulation in the context of blogging and how it can present what I believe to be a genuine danger to an emergent media already well-delineated along seemingly ideological lines - Left versus Right. Both liberal and conservative bloggers decry an apparent lack of objectivity in the MSM. But except for some few and far between self-professed voices of moderation, many bloggers seem to follow up that charge with an intense skew of their own along ideological lines.

The ideal concept behind a news media is not for it to be weighted heavily one way or another but to be truly balanced. One could argue that both sides of today's blogosphere balance one another out. But there's very little to suggest that's true except in the context of sniping across the lines as readers of one side or the other appear to mostly stay on their own sides.

The danger as regards some issues, like Pork Busting for example, is that politicians as a whole can triangulate, if you will, bloggers, Left versus Right, to in essence seek cover and defense from one side less likely to target a particular politician because of his or her party affiliation.

And on the other hand, with scandals from the NSA leaks to Jack Abrahamoff, which do appear to have definite roots in the disparate political parties, bloggers widely split along almost party lines do more to negate one another than to mount some united, altruistic assault on potential governmental malfeasance in general.

Don Singleton responds to a HuffingtonPost piece in which Jesse Kornbluth suggests that George Soros buy CNN. And in doing so he suggests Fox News is fair and balanced. Frankly, outside of Hume and a few others, perhaps - I don't know what Fox News wants to be besides entertaining. But be that as it may, the issue here is blogging. And if blogs are going to counteract real or perceived subjectivity in news reporting, they are going to have to do it with objectivity and not simply trying to scream louder for their particular cause.

Those that agree with you will love it - those who disagree will love to attack you - but the vast majority of Americans who really are independent and not stridently partisan one way or another are most likely simply going to tune you out, or click on by.

Is fair and balanced something that can actually be achieved in today's highly charged political atmosphere, particularly across the blogosphere? Or is it already doomed to be little more than a marketing angle for an admittedly successful though still marginal cable television media operation? Frankly, I'm not sure.

Comments

[Steel]

Well written piece Dan.

The short answer is - yes, 'fair & balanced' can be achieved.

I am old enough to remember rip&read pulled from teletype machines.

Before the wire services attained bias.

Just the facts in a short blurb and it was up to the news reader to report the facts.

If the reader imposed bias or flavor it was usually deplored.

Then a funny thing happened ... Paul Harvey.

In the 60s he became ever more flavorful. His popularity spawned countless small venue imitations that ultimately led to Limbaugh.

The 'opposition' gravitated toward PBS/NPR in the 70s.

The facts ARE just the facts. But it's no longer 'entertaining' to just hear them, because for the last 20+ years we have grown accustomed to that 'flavor'.

Sort of like salt. At first, a little goes a long way. Over time you use more. One day the doctor tells you it is killing you and you try and eliminate it from your diet.

Then everything tastes bland.

There's been a bunch of attempts to rectify this situation.

Jon Stewart. Naked female anchors in Russia. Drudge. The 'crawl'. And now Breitbart.

Each one nothing more than another condiment. If used sparingly - palatable. But just like salt, one tends to overdo it.

Fair & balanced today can ONLY be achieved by availing oneself of all of them in moderation. Moderation in the first two connotations.

1. partakng an amount not harmful.

2. Controlling a debate.

That is all.

[Steel]

So much for starting a debate.

[Phoenix]

So much for starting a debate? ha ha ha. :}

Y U P.

I think you both cancelled out your separate pieces by being so reasonable.

[callmeBetty]

Bring out the gladiators....... ;)

[thealamo]

Okay I'll start the debate. Kill 'em all!

Seriously, excellent article Dan.
Triangulation however has been used a lot longer than they will admit. If you go back to the 60's as an example, Kennedy was labelled a liberal. Today, he would be "ultra" conservative. How was this accomplished? Triangulation. We now have a far left, and a left, relatively speaking. They ahve slowly "sung" the old "right" to the left, so to speak and now we no longer question why the federal government is doing this, or that, but which party is doing the doing. Neat move on their part.
One need only to watch what is happening to see that the "right" is actually carrying out the agenda of the "left." Therefore, there is actually no "middle" but only a true "left" as far as results are concerned...and results are what counts.

In the 60's the debate was over whether the federal government should be involved in this, or that. Today it is no longer an issue and the "issue" is who can accomplish more federal control than the other. Pretty simple plan really. Why not? It works. They pick an agenda...then draw up what they will accept as a worse case scenario, and then take the opposite extremes. This way, they can "fight" and always win.
If they can keep people fighting over semantics, and not paying any attention to what they actually do--then they can do what they are doing, and the MSM is all too happy to compliment the agenda.

So...Dan form tne new right, er middle--to balance it out!

[thealamo]

should have proof read:

it should read they have slowly swung...somewhere up there above..