How about we be more selective in whose analysis we choose to read? With no sense of informed perspective, a reader determined to be an omnivore of punditry can wind up headspun pretty good.

Good point, Paul. I agree.

Aw, don't worry. Give it a couple months and he'll be the goat again.

Just think of political reporters the same way you do the TV reporters reporting Snowpocolypse 2010 and you'll realize they all rely on Fear and overblown buzzwords.

Meanwhile, we're still a third world country drowning in debt from multiple foreign wars of Republican adventure that serve only to enrich Red China at the American middle class' expense.

@3 for the insightful analysis win. Until the Republicants try to shut down the government.

So you're saying that the main stream media doesn't even qualify as good fiction? No argument from me.

This does play into the narrative of a few months ago, e.g. "remember that X president did badly in the mid-terms but got re-elected."

Why don't we start with Savage's whining about Obama?

Amen, Paul. I constantly think this very same thing every time the narrative shifts. News outlets (including the Stranger, sometimes) need to called out on perpetuating this whole win-lose, up-down way of discussing politics. it drives me insane that sometimes I don't feel anymore educated about a policy or social problem by the end of an article than when I started, but I know who got a good jab into the other side.

OBAMA IS A SOCIALIST. A SOCIALIST!

1.) Excellent point. But how often does the "can't we all just stop with the hysterics" point really end up resonating with the media?

2.) The Googlebook (which is what I choose to call it) has made you into a Slog-posting machine, hasn't it?

We also wouldn't have many news stories at all....

Well said.

After the election, I put myself on a media diet. I turned off NPR. Yes, that's right, I turned off NPR. I've turned it on again once in a while, but I'm trying only to listen to the entertainment programs (yay Wait Wait and TAL!). What would be the impact if we all decided to refuse to consume the pap they give us (not that NPR is all pap, but you know, my point is that it is my major news source, and that's what I need to eliminate). I think the hardest thing would be to get the FOX News listening crowd to give it up. But in my heart, I like to believe that there's a bunch of them who are as sick of it as we are.

Everything Paul writes is thick with narrative.

"National Desk! What's the headline?"
"Same as for the last six months boss: 'Slow Progress Being Made.' "
"Love it! Print that baby!"

*****MEANWHILE, AT THE TV STATION ACROSS TOWN***********************************
"Well, boss, it looks like the paper scooped us again with another 'Slow Progress' story."
"Damn them! Do we have any footage for that? Maybe we can give it a human angle"
"No. There's no footage."
"Well, what do we have?"
"We've got footage of a water-skiing squirrel."
"We've got our lead story! Teasers on the hour and half-hour starting at noon."

npr is nothing but another schill for soros maybe not quite as much as the huffy post , but he gives them millions to do his bidding. npr is just as for sale as any other medium . don't kid your selves they have been bought and pimped.

I tried to watch some politics the other day on MSNBC.com and it was almost 100% fluff. Nothing was reported on the massive pieces of legislation that just passed. It's all, "OMG HOW WONDERFUL IS OBAMA FOR DOING EVERYTHING" instead of, "Hey we just spent record amounts of money on tax cuts, we're spending another how many billion on Afghanistan for how many years?, we just passed a food safety bill without any new regulations on factory farms". Look I understand that things like DADT are important, but when the haze clears it would be awesome if someone in this fucking world besides Amy Goodwin actually report some real fucking truth. I don't want to hear about stupid fucking polls that never include cell phone users about how awesome people respond when you ask them if they like money. It's not fucking news, it doesn't mean anything, and unless we start reporting on reality, instead of what we hope reality to be, maybe we'll get to the bottom of why our congress continues to rubber stamp corporate bullshit.

Yes. Well said!

While I think the whole narrative thing has been around as long as journalism (at least, sensationalistic journalism) has been around, I think the advent of 24/7 cable news has made things a million times worse, because the only way to fill up all that time and seemingly keep people "informed" with the most "up-to-date information" is to continually dissect and analyze fairly minimal information about an event, over and over again. While I've always been bugged by this, it was last year's obsessive coverage of Tiger Woods' "accident" outside his house (later revealed to be an adultery confrontation, but at the time, was presented as an accident for several days, during which nothing new developed), that I realized how taking one tiny occurrence and analyzing it to death is what nearly all news has become.

I will say the one news show I watch is the Newshour on PBS. It's generally pretty good about giving you some substantive content to digest, and then moving on. But that's partially because it's a weekday daily show, with a finite timeframe -- they have to be particular and make choices about what to cover, and generally, don't have the pressure of stringing people along to sell advertising. The same can't really be said of NPR, since they are a 24/7 station that requires continual content, even if they are recycling info over and over.

#14:
"Everything Paul writes is thick with narrative."
Thank you! Paul is the worst offender. (See, e.g., every single post on the "brainy" Newt Gingrich.) Is it possible he is that lacking in self-awareness? I mean, right here in this post, he suggests substituting the current narrative with a different one!

Totally agree, but the Word of the Year is still going to be "cable."

Well said, Paul, but nevertheless...

#7 FTW!

Ha! See Mudede post above ("shocked" at Obama's progress), complete with Sloggers whining about how shitty our president is. Really makes me want them to live for the next eight years in Jesusland with McCain/Palin.