The media pundit's pundit. Written by NYC insider Jeff Jarvis, BuzzMachine covers news, media, journalism, and politics.
In The Times’ hinterlands
: The Times doesn’t get Jersey, never has. See below and see this by Adam Nagourney in Sunday’s paper:
Voters seem willing to accept, to a certain extent, gay people as television characters and even as next-door neighbors. Yet for politicians, there are limits, as Mr. McGreevey made clear.
Listen to the voters about the voters, man, not to McGreevey about the voters. Go read forums and blogs and comments and see that you’re just not listening.
Adam Nagourney doesn’t “get” anything, except a paycheck from the NYT, whose bosses haven’t figured out that the guy is one of the most gullible reporters around.
See Mickey Kaus’ site for more.
Well, as a lifetime New Jerseyan, I’d have to say I am perfectly accepting of whatever persuasion McGreevey is, or any other politician. The issue most people take with him is that they felt he was quite corrupt in various areas, and the most recent news has allowed him to be removed from office, seemingly “on his own.”
Hasn’t McGreevey thwarted the will of the people by resigning ?
How dare he resign prior to be being totally discredit and shown for all to see that he is an asp.
Wow, not more than 3 days ago you cry about Glenn Reynolds obsessing over Kerry’s Christmas in Cambodia story ( a story receiving no major media attention) and now in the past 2 days about 90 percent of your posts are about McGreevey, mostly pertaining to the gay angle of the story. Doesn’t this seem contradictory to your whole philosophy on blogs. The idea that blogs keep the media in check.
You have one story, Kerry’s ever evolving Vietnam saga that now seems to be changing every hour, which is getting no major media coverage. And the McGreevey story which has been carried by every media outlet around.
Not more than 3 days ago you call out Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit for obsessing about the Kerry story and for the past 2 days 90 percent of your posts are about McGreevey. Don’t you find something contradictory about that?
Come on Jeff, I consider your blog to be one of the best around, but your ignorance of the Kerry story (especially with the major media not picking it up) is disturbing.
sorry about the repititiveness of my post….it’s been a long night.
Mike’s got a point Jeff. You sure have gone gay quite a bit lately with your coverage. So I’ll be the Golan Cipel in the punchbowl here, and ask the question:
When are you going to announce “I’m a gay American blogger, and I’m forced to resign because the blogosphere, much like New Jersey, simply is not gay enough for me. Oh sure, it’s a sausage party, but it’s more like a sausage party of guys looking at Star Trek: Voyager reruns to catch Seven-of-Nine in her catsuit. Sure, it looks gay as all hell, but it really isn’t, in spite of the demographics. So there’s nothing really gay to blog about here, and I’ve decided to quit.”
If you want, I can start some rumors – that should help you along. I also hear that Frank J is interested in taking over this IP address to market some new kind of electrically operated minigun, hence “Buzz Machine”, so long as you hold onto the site until November 15th, and as long as you don’t completely gay it all up with gay talk about gay governors resigning because they are completely gay…
Okay, okay, joke’s over. In truth I think Mike’s kinda blowing this out of proportion. You are doing some pretty good coverage of the issue. Yeah, I’d be worried about you breathing life into a scandal (much of which is really beneath our dignity to discuss), if the puny NY Times with its million plus daily circulation wasn’t working so bloody hard to pound the facts into the standard “Republicans hate gays” story.
Mike:
1. It’s news.
2. It’s news that is happening today, not decades ago.
3. It’s in my home state, where I work in the news business.
4. It’s a scandal about a politician in office using that office and the state’s coffers to make strange bedfellows. That’s far different from either the Kerry or Bush “stories.”
5. I will drop this as quickly as it fades from the news. It’s not an obsession. It has been only two days.
6. I have no axe to grind, only that McGreevey was a crappy governor for whom I unfortunately voted.
Your dog don’t hunt.
*The Times doesn’t get Jersey, never has.*
Soooo true! Possibly the most accurate observation you ever wrote here.
I wasn’t at all shocked that McG said he is gay; but I was shocked that he tried to use this lame excuse for getting out of office.
NJ is the most corrupt state in the Union– in a class by itself. It’s a cesspool. I couldn’t get of there fast enough.
It is a totally degenerate place in which the State operates with a real criminal modus operandi– the policy is to seek out and pick on the most vulnerable and weak members of society and then bully them for their lunch money. Jeff, you really have no idea of how bad it is.
The classic example, of course, was when they announced the biggest upsurge in TB which was followed by the announcement of a new tax on disposable paper products like tissues and toilet paper. They should have been indicted for genocide just on that basis alone.
All good points, and I would agree with you. Although I didn’t vote for him and your dog should be hunting. Both stories deserve attention. and your continuing silence on the Kerry thing is deafening. The 30 years ago thing doesn’t play because Kerry keeps talking about Vietnam and there is no Bush story there so why bring it up. The Kerry story is evolving daily and Vietnam is the centerpiece of his campiagn. You should be taking the major dailies to task.
Jeff,
“2. It’s news that is happening today, not decades ago.”
Umm, Mike’s point is exactly correct, the -media’s- silence RIGHT NOW in re Kerry IS THE STORY! It Admit it, if Bush had spun his service 1/10th as much as Kerry, the mainstream media would have fried him alive, considering how they ran for MONTHS with utterly idiotic and ill-informed stories about his Guard service.
Typical NYT hogwash. Of course, it had nothing to do with being gay and everything to do with being corrupt and dishonest. I want to see all the respectable gay types come out and denounce the phonies using the gay victim mantra!
Jeff, here’s the spin that’s being set up with Nagourney’s article — if your story alleges McGreevey was ousted from office for his sexual prefrences, you can then point towards “villians” who forced him out of office (or would have forced him out of office) because of their opposition to gay rights. But if your story focues on corruption as the reason why McGreevey had to resign, with the appointment of his alleged gay lover to the homeland secuirty post as part of the problem, then the only villian in the piece is McGreevey.
Based on all the corruption information that has come out so far — 99 percent of it before McGreevey’s announcement — its obvious that a responsible reporter would focus on the second story theme. But if you’re looking to make someone else the bad guy for political purposes, then the first option makes sense. Based on Nagourney’s past stories, I’m surprised he didn’t interview Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson or James Dobson to get a good Republican-fundamentalists-hate-homosexuals quote to really hammer across the point behind he article.
The NY Times is more out-of-touch than you realize.
It’s been an open secret in NJ for several years that McGreevey was gay, or at least bisexual. Anyone with an ear to the ground in NJ politics has heard these rumors for years. I have a business relationship with several police officers in Woodbridge, where he was the mayor, and back then they told me about rendez-vous in parking lots with men.
And yet no one cared about the rumors. No one. The cops I spoke to didn’t run to the Record or the Star-Ledger. The state Democratic party had to know of the existance of the rumors, but went with McGreevey anyway.
Everyone knew he was gay, but no one cared. That’s how homophobic the state is.
Gays on the coasts will never admit how far things have moved in their favor. Like many women’s and other minority groups they have a vested interest in maintaining a misery index. I don’t doubt his being openly gay would have caused him some trouble when running for office with at least some voters though. I believe the main fear people would have of a gay or any minority candidate is whether or not he/she would be working for everyone or be focusing on his/her “group” goals first.
I forgot to add, McGreevy was apparently only working for McGreevy either way.
I think that’s quite true Ptolemy and it’s so unfortunate. In reality, it’s not minority groups who actually follow through with that theory, it’s the dominant groups. The Bushie’s and other WASPS have not tended to work for everyone…instead they work for their own christian, wealthy, and male-dominated interests first.
It would be interesting to see, should we be given the opportunity, if a minority political figure would focus on his/her own interests just like Bush et al. or if the minority candidate has been afforded a different perspective on life, enabling him/her to see a bigger picture where the interests at hand would benefit all. time will tell, I suppose.
Jarvis:
“2. It’s news that is happening today, not decades ago.”
You’re as blinkered as that Nagourney you criticize (which makes you the expert, I reckon). Kerry has made what happened over fewer than four months “decades ago” the centerpiece of his campaign and the basis for his claim to fitness for command NOW.
Kerry has misrepresented his service in the Boston papers, via his hagiographer Brinkley, to the Washington Post, and in the Congressional Record for “decades NOW“. He’s taking on the stench of a fantasist, and your lame dismissals do nothing to dissipate that stench.
Just because you don’t like to hear it, doesn’t make it irrelevant.
–furious
I don’t for one minute believe McGreevey resigned because he is a practicing gay man or that he resigned due to remorse and/or fear of scandal. I’d bet grocery money that McGreevey was told to resign by Democratic interests more powerful than he. When the allegations came to light about an attempt to extort scads of money from McGreevey, money he probably doesn’t have and was unable to secure elsewhere for such a purpose, the FBI became involved. This time they will not just looking at McGreevey supporters and aides involved in corruption; they will be looking at directly at McGreevey and his activities while NJ governor. My guess a whole lot of other powerful Democrats and their behavior will come to light if the office of the NJ governor is thoroughly investigated and it has them worried. Already many Democrats are calling for McGreevey to leave as soon as possible in order to hopefully limit the scope of the investigation. A new Democratic governor would be more able to fight requests for information citing executive privilege without seeming to be purposefully attempting to thwart a criminal investigation. He would simply be behaving governorly. McGreevey being the target of such an investigation would be viewed as obstructing justice and would be unable to withstand such pressure, which is what most likely is occurring at this moment and will continue long into the future.