Call for the Pushitzers

When The Times comes out with its story on the story on Judy Miller, reportedly this weekend, I’m not sure whether I’ll read it first or whether I’ll go to those who will give me the play-by-play and game analysis: Jay Rosen, Arianna Huffington, Mickey Kaus, Powerline, Howard Kurtz… where else?

As I was making this list this morning, during my “run,” as I was also listening to On The Media. And it so happened that they interviewed the elusive, hermitic, hermetic Jim Romenesko, whom I’ve never heard before. They were talking about how he made his mark during the Jayson Blair scandal. Wonder why he has not during l’affaire Judy. Wonder whether that’s why he suddenly started to do PR. Does he feel left behind? Tired to their wired? He said he was uncomfortable being seen as the place where people come to see how the sausage is made, badly. He won’t call himself a blogger. He apparently doesn’t see himself as a press critic. But, of course, that’s what the Miller story is all about.

The real news on news is happening with the press critics online. This was a genre that couldn’t flourish before — because you had to go to the guy with the press to publish your criticism of the press. But now it is blooming like an Outback onion.

And so I wondered who is doing the best job dogging the dogs of the press. I’m opposed to awards — I think the Pulitzers have too often skewed journalism to serve prize juries over the public — and so I won’t suggest another damned A-list. But I do want to note who are the go-to guys on deciphering and debunking pressthink. Who do you think they are?

  • Shirley

    Never heard of Romenesko? Do you read?

  • Duneview

    Shirley –

    “Heard” – as in listened to is significantly different than “heard of” – as in being aware.

    In this case, Jeff clearly stated the former.

    So…who is it that doesn’t read?

  • I think anyone that has created a blog and is watching the press is doing a fine job creating an environment in which they cannot flourish unless they’re real good.

    There are so many voices that have always existed–including mine–but until the net came around we had no REAL voice that was able to compete with what we read.

    Now we can research, read various sources…

    we can link the AP alert, give an opinion, and then do some backup research and show people what we found out.,

    It’s amazing how the press has regained its traditional roots of havoc-making truth muckraking….
    too bad the press is the staple of the country that lost its ability to muck rake

  • Jeff: not to be too immodest, but I try to work the MSM over pretty good at quillnews. TC

  • David

    >But, of course, that’s what the Miller story is all about.

    The miller “story” is about the corrupt white house occupants who are about to get theirs.

  • Jorge

    Eric Alterman’s Slacker Friday has a unique take on why Main Stream journalists couldn’t bring themselves to criticize Bush early on in and before his first term. I credit Eric for having plenty of criticizism personally but please don’t let the enablers of The President and his Outlaw Gang off in any way shape or form.
    The MSM has plenty to regret and be sorry for . There isn’t enough space to list half of the purported crimes commited in the name of our country. The Corporate media could have helped stop this catastrophe . The most egregious act of cowardice by the media was their complicity in the convoluted Machiavellian propaganda spewed by the Administration.

  • Hi Jeff.

    I started doing media analysis columns for Blog Critics about one month ago, just in time to get on some licks before, during and after the Miller MEdia Mess reached the paper’s own front page this morning.

    That’s been an interesting ride.
    my latest is here:

    I think Jay Rosen’s Press Think has been doing the best job covering the issue.