Air ScameriKKKa Update

Still not much attention from the MSM about this story and that's the subject of Missing the Perfect Storm at the Weekly Standard's site.

THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA is often inconsistent in covering stories. They gave us wall-to-wall coverage when George W. Bush's National Guard service came under scrutiny, but suddenly made themselves scarce when over two hundred Vietnam veterans pointed out hole after hole in John Kerry's service narrative. When Rush Limbaugh ran into legal problems surrounding his addiction to painkillers, we heard breathless updates on subpoenas and court orders, but when Eason Jordan revealed his predilection to slandering the U.S. military, again the press pulled a disappearing act.

Michael LeBoeuf once commented that the elements of the perfect fiction would involve religion, royalty, sex, and mystery--and then boiled it down to one sentence: "My God," said the Queen, "I'm pregnant. I wonder who did it?" Is there a grand-unified theory of media interest and if so, what elements need to come together to make the perfect journalistic storm?

We often hear journalists claim that their mission consists of afflicting the comfortable and comforting the afflicted. One crucial element must therefore put powerful people under a spotlight. Some journalists say that they fight for the little guy, the downtrodden, which means that the story must include victims. Still others like investigative work, digging through arcane paperwork and doubletalk to reveal misdeeds that otherwise would never come to light, which means that a crime or at least unethical conduct would help draw interest. And finally, big money always attracts a crowd and helps audiences relate to the disgraceful actions unveiled by the reporter.

Thus, the perfect journalistic storm would arise when powerful people victimize the poor and downtrodden, breaking laws or at least ethical constructs, by taking money meant for their benefit. That sort of story will get anyone's attention. All it takes is one reporter to tell the story, and the rest of the media will jump all over it. Right?

He then lays out the old news to anyone reading the Blogosphere and not watching the MSM before concluding:

The mission of the mainstream media to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable, to tell truth to power, and to hold the reverse Robin Hoods accountable for their malfeasance wouldn't depend on the politics of the criminals.

Would it?

Well....duh.

Michelle Malkin-Belligerent wonders where are the race hustlers like Revs. Al and Jesse? As Deep Throat said, "Follow the money."

The Radio Equalizer also wonders about the "Double Standards" of the MSM while covering the previous two stories and mentioning about the talker suspended for speaking the Truth about Islam as a terrorist organization (scroll down here for that one) as compared to a pair of hip-hop DJs advising how to attack police:

Equally disturbing is what's going on in St. Louis, where radio industry veteran Mike Anderson of STLMedia has been waging a one-man battle for three weeks against two hip-hop DJ's who urged listeners to attack the police, just after a city cop was murdered in cold blood.

This officer's message board comment paints a picture of the environment:

I think that everyone should know what was being said this morning on 100.3's morning show. They were actually discussing how to hurt officers. Callers were calling in and giving "tips" as to how to properly fight the police.

One "tip" that was discussed was that you should always fight for the officer's radio and take it so they are unable to call for help. In fact, according to 100.3, 80% of officers on the street are p$%#$s who will not do anything except talk sh-t.

In light of recent events, I find it very disheartening that a professional (at least they used to be) radio station would do this.

-- PLEASE, contact the station managers at Clear Channel Communications and voice your displeasure for having these radio DJs' giving a lesson in how to hurt/fight police officers.

-- If, for nothing else, do this for MAC. His death has been turned into a circus. Do the right thing. Please stay safe out there!

Yes, the media and "civil rights leaders" don't have a problem with this either, do they?

While the DJ's have been suspended, they haven't faced termination, thanks to selective outrage. But Anderson's stubborn determination to see justice served provides an excellent example for every discouraged Internet maverick.

I'm not sure, however, that these on-air thugs will be fired.

One to watch closely in the next week will be the fate of WMAL/Washington talk show host Michael Graham, who was yanked from the airwaves after a long campaign by the Council for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), seemed to finally bear fruit.

Graham made comments about Islam being a religion of terror, that while bold, aren't terribly atypical.

Rather than admit censorship was the reason behind the removal, Graham's forced holiday was dismissed by many as an old-fashioned radio stunt. That was easier than the unpleasant prospect of defending a conservative talk host on free-speech grounds.

Where's the outrage over Graham's removal due to nothing more than relatively strong opinions on issues? Isn't that his job? After all, he didn't call for any cops to be murdered.

Which is just the point: the police-bashing St. Louis DJ's have a better chance of keeping their jobs than Graham, in today's political environment.

These are tough lessons about double standards and selective outrage. We really have but one tool to fight back, the same way Mike Anderson has, with a stubborn compulsion to follow through on these issues.

Free speech is for everyone, isn't it? According to the Left and the MSM, it isn't.