RatherBiased isn't sure what to do with itself next:
As March 9, the day of Dan Rather's retirement fast approaches, we're deciding what to do with RatherBiased.com. Should we expand it into a community site where registered users can fact-check all media? Should we freeze the site to preserve it for the historical record? Or should we do something else?
Click on the link above and let'em know what you think.
Me, I think the name "RatherBiased" will still suit, even after Gunga Dan retires next month. Really, it perfectly encapsulates everything wrong with the MSM. All the good folks at RB need to do after March 9 is broaden their scope.
Change the title to "MSM_WATCH". Drop RatherBiased and move on. Leaving it will be like exhibiting the scalp for public view, and potentially a reminder of many bloggers biases as well.
Not the memory the blogosphere wants to leave, I think.
Speaking entirely for myself and under the influence of Dristan, I'd really like to see a clear delineation in the pursuit of bias.
See, everybody has bias. Period. Objectivity is a myth. So bias, in and of itself, is not bad.
What's bad is hidden bias. When somebody pretends to be disinterested but actually has a strong underlying opinion about something, that's bad.
I'd like to see a very clear and public focus on seeking to "out" people who try to hide their biases. Because otherwise we could collectively get a nasty reputation for just going after anybody that pisses us off.
For instance, I don't think we ever would have gone after Jeff Gannon, even if he'd been openly liberal. Because people who are open about their agenda and their advocacy aren't a problem. It's people like Eason who pretend to be unbiased but aren't who are a problem.
Did that make any sense?
Jeff-
Must add O'Reilly to the list- He is a rash on the face of all.
From the latest on Drudge, looks like the CBS lawsuits will continue long after Rather retires.
I think Dan Rather isn't done with the media, and that his memoirs will give them plenty to write about.
