Weigelgate And Winning The New Media War

Moving beyond Weigel himself and various reactions to the recent story, if there was a Weigelgate, it involved the Washington Post. And I always saw it as important in winning the New Media war, which is why I've always been so hard on Weigel here and on Twitter.

Hiring Ezra Klein to blog from the Left and Weigel, as much a Leftist, as he is a Libertarian, to cover the Right was a blatant effort by big Beltway media to marginalize the Right - intentionally, or not. Most likely, it demonstrated how skewed is the view of the Post's management. And they don't even realize it - such is the big media echo chamber.

Klein blogged policy, Weigel the so called fringe. But what really is the fringe in America today?

Melissa Clouthier argues that it's not conservatives, but the mostly liberal elite in big media better defined as some fringe. She has a valid point, though I don't think all people who self-identify as conservative are as of the Right as many conservatives out here. But they certainly aren't liberal, either - and are likely more of the center-Right.

No, the problem, Mr. Alexander, is that The Post would have to write about someone to cover the conservatives as if they’re a special breed of American. The problem is that conservative views are the mainstream views–but not in Washington, D.C. or New York City or San Francisco.

Blogging excited me years ago not simply because I could post my own news and opinions, but because it represented the beginnings of a new media war, of sorts. Conservatives lost the old media war decades ago and have been paying the price for it politically ever since. Anyone who doubts the importance of new media and a subsequent new media war is kidding himself. It will go a long way toward defining America politically for generations.

And there are two important parts to that war - what media the Right can itself produce, and a refusal to kowtow to an old media as it attempts to simply export its previous dominance out onto the web. The Weigel/Klein scenario was a classic example of that.

While many of us were focused on Weigel, a bevy of fine bloggers were taking on a Fox outlet over some open mic comments by on scene observers at a Palin speech.

Beyond Weigel: While the legacy media sleeps, new-media sleuths get the scoop

Today we have outlets such as PajamasMedia and TV, the Daily Caller, Beitbart's Big Journalism, Hollywood and Government - along with his video at Breitbart TV and the ever  impactful RealClearPolitics. On top of that, we have various sites and blogs generating worthwhile Right-side content today far beyond the reach of the big money Right that's mostly DC-based.

I challenged even some friends who were defending Weigel, because in my view, they were putting personal preference, friendship, ambition, or what have you, over the need for the Right to win the new media war. That's perfectly understandable. We're all human. But it is also a classic example of how an echo chamber like DC, or inside politics, can negatively influence our overall ability to fight and win this new media war.

Beyond the coming elections, there is no greater political fight in America than the one going on in new media today. And just as the Left takes no prisoners when it comes to politics and political media because it wants to win, I don't believe we can afford to take prisoners on the Right, either.

If we don't win, or at least fight this new media war to a draw, generations of Americans who come after us will pay the price for conservative's inability to help create, or shape the nature of the larger media narrative that informs a mostly non-political America.

It's a long war and a fight we can't afford to lose. Exposing Weigelgate because of the Post's editorial decision-making was an important battle we hardly had to fight in. The Left brought down Weigel by exposing his listserve communications. But any notion that we shouldn't have taken full advantage of the opportunity by hammering on it - and by necessity, hammering on Weigel, was short-sighted and counterproductive to our cause. It also points out how we cannot rely on established inside the Beltway conservative media to win this new war for us.

The battle must be fought and won by mostly citizens - and those outlets with the sense and good judgment to establish themselves, or their identity, beyond the reach of Beltway politics. That influence is as dangerous to conservative new media, as it is to conservative politics.

Any new resurgence in conservatism and Right-side media must and will come from the American people today if it is to be truly successful. And the majority of the American people do not live inside the Beltway. We should never lose sight of that fact, lest we risk having our thinking becoming as corrupted as mostly everyone else's subjected to DC.

It swallows presidents and congressman, year after year. We can't allow it to swallow our new media efforts, or we will lose the new media war, just as we lost the old one. And the consequences of that would be tragic for us as conservatives and for America as a whole.

Comments

[Bob]

And Weigel was a mole, someone pretending to be something he was not.
How common is this and how often does it turn the conversation to the Left's advantage?
Brothers Judd blog has a post from the 27th "It would be helpful..." exploring Glenn Beck's insidious influence on the Tea Party.
Moles must be exposed. Behavioral science used to advance socialism must be exposed. Liberty advanced.

[Gary]

We all knew that around 90-95% of "journalists", and their editors, (former "journalists") are democrats, vote democrat, and mold their take on the news to help democrats get elected. If not for this unfortunate fact, very few democrats WOULD get elected, IMHO.

But this takes things to a whole new level. This is collusion on a grand scale. Suddenly all those multiple sound-bites that Rush and others play of everyone in media repeating the same mantras make much more sense from a "how does this happen?" point of view.

It's quite simply ---- cheating. It's no different really than the refs getting together before a game discussing the best way to massage calls in order to benefit their favorite team. Yeah, if it's at all close, call it for our guys, and I'll back you up. Ernie, you with us in the replay booth? Of course guys, come on. I hate that team as much as ya'all.

Must be nice. But it's gotta feel kinda crappy deep down when you realize you haven't really won fair and square.

[TL Davis]

One big hammer in this war is getting traditional media, especially radio commentators, to reference the conservative blogs as sources of good, conservative information. Rush does an excellent job of this, but whatever pull one might have it needs to be exerted on local radio hosts to do the same. That would help a great deal to expand the reach and impact from blogs to average Americans who vote.

[Lisa Graas]

It's not 'cheating', Gary, it's organizing.

[FeFe]

Those defending Weigel remind me of the ridiculous people handing out participation awards for Little League rather than keeping score.

[Gary]

Not sure if you're kidding, Lisa, I think you probably are, but the supposed people's news media is not supposed to "organize" to benefit one particular political party, any more than referees are supposed to do so for a sports team they prefer.

[Brian]

What we need are counter-moles to expose the raw e-mails of Journolist and successor to Journolist. Expose the collusion of every one of the MSMers on these lists.

[Don M]

Conspiracy in restraint of trade, violation of Sherman Anti Trust acts. If oil companies colluded this way on their products and prices, they would be pilloried.

[george]

The first thing we do is kill all the reporters." Wasn't this from Henry VI?

[JEF]

The media is actually more aligned with hard left and progressives. They obviously hated Reagan, but I noticed during Clinton that the criticisms were always from the Left...more, bigger, "better" centralized government.

Our younger generation of "journalists" seems to be aligned with daily Kos. White privilege seems important to talk about for the JournoList people.

Domestic news isn't going to have much on stories like this:
http://www.financialpost.com/Avertible+catastrophe/3203808/story.html

or this

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jun/25/inside-the-black-panther-case-anger-ignorance-and-/

Senior Republicans must stand up for the country. They must be willing to sacrifice themselves to vicious attacks. There is some safety in numbers...Palin, et al. can't do it by themselves

[Steevo]

I simplify the echo chamber and overall negative influence as a bankruptcy in principle, period. The lack of depth and honest to goodness values. These are self-centered people who delude themselves. They truly don't care about liberty and justice for all.

[TomJW]

The first thing we do is kill all the reporters." Wasn't this from Henry VI?

Posted by: george | Sunday, June 27, 2010 at 11:29 PM

It was in Julius Caesar. Someone said let's kill all the laywers, but they are both in the same party, so we should get both to be sure.

[Amos]

I have to disagree with much of the assessment. The problem with the paradigm of left and right is that we've allowed the left to define it.

There is very little right of the kind today that compares to the left.

We all pretty much agree that the left has collectivist inclinations. The left attempts to argue that the right balances that with moral inclinations. But the left's collectivism IS a moral inclination. And yet, there isn't much of a right-wing collectivism. Well, what would that look like?

NAZISM! says the left. That's convenient, but not true. The only real difference between Nazis and Communists was that one directly went for the nationalism and racism and the other went for internationalism. But did they? Let me rephrase that: did they, round-eyed gringo? The Russians did not fight the Great War for Communism. They fought the Great Patriotic War.

No, a right-wing collectivism is a monarchy or theocracy. Think Mayans, if you want an extreme example.

People who want liberty are not right wing. Liberty doesn't say, "only for right wingers." It says, "liberty." We did away with much of right-wing collectivism during the enlightenment. You still see bits of it here and there, but nothing in the way that you see people actually winning acclaim for writing paeans to their missing Marxist daddies.

[M. Simon]

Bob,

Here is a link:

http://brothersjuddblog.com/archives/2010/06/it_would_be_helpful.html

[JadedByPolitics]

The thinking that Weigel was a tad Libertarian is a wrong as well. I have always said that the left and these so call libertarians on the right are so damn close that they have actually closed the CIRCLE! In reality they both basically are anarchists Weigel being the perfect example of it. I would say that if WE are to change the thinking of people that OUR Conservatives should utilize Weigelgate when on tv shows and in print interviews by looking at the CNNMSDNCNBCCBSABCNYT etc and saying "are those journolist talking points".....and then STOP the interview!

[M. Simon]

"not supposed to" is the seeds of defeat. Better to face facts. They will do what they feel they have to.

[paulejb]

Did Weigel call someone "macaca?"

[Lisa Graas]

Apologies, Gary. You were referring to the big leftist media and I was referring to leftist blogs when I referred to 'organizing'. Leftist bloggers were very organized during the Obama campaign. They were very good at consistently linking to the same material, for example.

[Kev]

"And the majority of the American people do not live inside the Beltway. We should never lose sight of that fact, lest we risk having our thinking becoming as corrupted as mostly everyone else's subjected to DC.

It swallows presidents and congressman, year after year. We can't allow it to swallow our new media efforts, or we will lose the new media war, just as we lost the old one. And the consequences of that would be tragic for us as conservatives and for America as a whole."

Perhaps a solution to this problem can be formulated using our advances in electronic communication. Wouldn't it be great if members of Congress were required to spend most of their time in their home states/districts, where they could, oh, have a lot more time to actually meet with their constituents? The vast majority of discussions could be done by teleconference, as could a lot of smaller-scale caucusing, and they could assemble in Washington for really important votes, such as spending bills.

This would have all kinds of advantages: It would keep the congresscritters more securely tethered to their home bases; it would stop the griping and moaning about having to maintain two households, as they could spend most of their time in their primary residence at home and stay in a small apartment or extended-stay hotel during their time in Washington; it would keep the lobbyists away (or at least force them to spread out all over the place in order to reach everyone, which might cause them to give up); and, most importantly, it would keep people out of the toxic atmosphere in Washington, which seems to transform even the best Mr. Smith into a power-hungry, money-grabbing defender of his own self-interest.

[Tennwriter]

Amos,
That's pretty interesting.

[John Ettorre]

The right mostly marginalizes itself, with its idiotic anti-intellectual boorishness. Grow up, people, and others will take you seriously. If not, not.

[North Dallas Thirty]

"The right mostly marginalizes itself, with its idiotic anti-intellectual boorishness."

Or, put differently, the fact that we actually expect you to work and produce results instead of just waving your college degree in sociology.

By the way, John Ettorre, I happen to have an undergraduate degree in biology and a graduate degree in business management. However, I credit an enormous amount of success to what I learned from my grandparents, none of which finished college, only two of which even finished grade school, but all of which worked, saved, spent intelligently, and are now enjoying comfortable retirements, having put all of their children through college and professional schools.

You and your fellow "intellectuals" have proven that you are all about talk, but expect everything to be handed you on a silver platter and for someone else to pay the bills while you insult them. That is the epitome of boorishness, and it is typical of your Barack Obama and your Obama Party.

[Too Blind To See]

"The right mostly marginalizes itself, with its idiotic anti-intellectual boorishness."

I agree. If the right would stop referring to their political opponents as ratfuckers and would discuss issues instead of wishing people would be set on fire or die of heart attacks, I might take them seriously. But since their leading lights indulge in this sort of anti-intellectual boorishness, I just write them off.

[JadedByPolitics]

Those defending Weigel make me think of those who will win a medal for holding their fire while their family BURIES them! It is interesting that those defending him are DC-ites. That damn kool-aid must be pretty good down there because whether they are sipping or swallowing whole they ALWAYS "convert".