I’m Afraid That It’s Called “Modern Reporting”

Posted on May 1, 2006 by Michael Froomkin

There is a rather major disconnect between, on the one hand this this insipid New York Times account of the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner and this almost as pointless account in the Washington Post, and on the other hand, Peter Daou’s take which left in the venom. Truth or truthiness? See the video and you be the judge. (The video is in three parts; the third IMHO is sort of a waste of time.)

This entry was posted in The Media. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to I’m Afraid That It’s Called “Modern Reporting”

  1. Steve says:
    May 1, 2006 at 5:28 pm

    I just watched the Colbert video and agree, the “demo tape” bit was overwrought and stooopid. It detracted from the rest of the message.

    Colbert’s delivery was a bit choppy but I guess it’s difficult to stay completely composed while flaying a man to little pieces when he’s sitting six feet way from you on the dais (not to mention the rest of the supine press corps in the same room). In general I don’t find Colbert all that amusing — the faux O’Reilly act only goes so far before it becomes as annoying as the original.

  2. Patrick (G) says:
    May 2, 2006 at 2:46 pm

    Overwrought, yes. stupid ? Not by a long shot.

    The demo tape had two parts:
    The conference that used splices of actual gaggle footage to demonstrate how sheep-like the White House Press Corp acts in the face of the utter contempt and condescension shown them by the Bush administration.

    And the closer, which was intentionally overwrought. It spoofs the hollywood (horror/action thriller) conventions for creating audience tension by stretching them out beyond the point of credibility. Working a garage (a la Deep Throat) into the segment is only one more dig at the Press.

    The Message to the Press was “why are you so afraid when these people are so scared of granny Helen Thomas? Is she the only one with cojones in the WH Press Corps ?”

  3. GregJ says:
    May 2, 2006 at 7:44 pm

    I agree. You should also see the articles like this at this site: http://www.saneworks.us.

  4. Steve says:
    May 2, 2006 at 8:47 pm

    Revising and extending my remarks, I’ll have to say that I largely agree with Patrick(G)‘s comment. The first part of the “demo reel” was fairly well done but the second half still spiraled into the toidy for me.

    I got the point. I just didn’t think it was all that well delivered.

Comments are closed.