[T]he false equivalency given to factually inaccurate crap has got to stop. If the public official with whom you are speaking is trying to sell you a load of bullshit, it is okay to call it manure. In fact, it is accurate to do so. As Jay [Rosen] says, too many journalists over the past few years have "lapsed into a phony kind of balance." If the facts do not support it, you aren't doing yourself any favors by pretending that both sides of an argument are equal. That is not balance, it is just phony.
This is my problem with the people who want to hide Don Imus behind the First Amendment. This is my problem with all those who whine about how "horrible" the "liberal media" and foul-mouthed liberal bloggers are to Bush and his criminal cronies. This is my problem with mainstream journalists like David Broder, Joe Klein, Thomas Friedman, Tim Russert, and others. They insist we have to take this crap, and not call it crap, because it comes from official sources. Sorry, but if you hold a spoon full of shit up to my mouth, insisting it is medicine and that I have to take it because you say so, my mouth is staying shut, and, by God, I will call it shit, no matter how much you insist it is medicine.
Why is it non-journalists seem to understand this concept so much better than journalists do? How difficult is it, in a story or during an interview, when someone lays down a real whopper, to just say, "You know what, that's just wrong, and I need to point that out." If the person wants to continue to lie, or insist on a falsehood, just keep calling them on it. It isn't that hard. You do it and do it, as often as you have to. If they cut you off from access to information, what in the world have you lost but a lying, no-good sack of shit? In fact, it would seem to me you could write a piece that included the following line:
I went to my usual source, X, who lied to me, and when I called him on it, he cut me off from information. Because he lied to me, I do not feel obliged to hide his identity any longer.
How about that for journalistic ethics?
