With “Innovation” Like This, No Wonder Political Reporting Is So Stupid

Recently, I wrote about the staggering stupidity of the national political press corps. Eric Alterman provides another example, the LA Times “chief innovation officer” (italics mine):

Take the example of the Tribune Company’s new owner, Sam Zell. Leaving aside his penchant for potty-mouth rejoinders for those who question his judgment, Zell has done nothing to slow the slide in the company’s fortunes and much to accelerate it. Scrambling like mad for cash to service the company’s debt, Zell sold off the profitable Newsday and borrowed $300 million against future earnings, a clear sign of panic. To advise him on long-term strategy, he has appointed as “chief innovation officer” Lee Abrams, a man who was apparently surprised to learn that reports datelined “Baghdad” are actually produced by reporters in Baghdad. His suggestion: “photos of the reporter with Iraqi kids” to advertise this fact.
Writing on his blog, Abrams mused that newspapers were “TOO NPR,” (caps in original), which he found “a bit elitist.” He would rather have newspapers “study the feel of a well honed All News Radio station,” which he defines as “being INTELLIGENT… not intellectual.”

My problem with NPR is that it’s often boring, although not as boring as news radio, which repeats the same story over and over and over and over…. But regarding Lee Abrams, if this is the big brain you bring in, it does explain how the Gang of 500 Mediocrities is viewed as intelligent.
In the land of the complete fucking moron, Adam Nagourney is king.

This entry was posted in Fucking Morons, News Media. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to With “Innovation” Like This, No Wonder Political Reporting Is So Stupid

  1. PhysioProf says:

    Jesus motherfucking christ! What kind of pathetic juvenile assmonkey dickbag uses the term “potty-mouth” to describe colorful language!?

  2. Brian X says:

    Oddly enough, I’m pretty sure selling off profitable assets to shore up unprofitable ones is pretty universally derided as hedging in the wrong direction. Sort of reminds me of a story I heard a few years ago where a big-city radio station (I want to say in Chicago, but don’t quote me on it) decided to sell ad space in its traffic reports… the buyer was a major area sports arena that got to be the main reference point for downtown traffic distances, even though its location was completely useless to commuters.

Comments are closed.