I think Noonan is being sincere. Sometimes, in the heat of the moment we might say something that we don’t quite mean. I think her “off-mike” comments was something just like this: she was feeling frustrated about the whole thing, and in one of those “pessimistic, emotional moments” said something to a friend who she knew knew she was speaking out of frustration. Perhaps five minutes later, she caught herself and said, “Hmm… maybe this might not be as bad as I thought”.

In other words, we are human, and this blogpost is flattening out this complexity in route to implying that this shows Noonan is unreliable or untrustworthy.

Yes, wanting to know Noonan’s opinion is appropriate because she is a commentator, not a journalist. You seem to have the two mixed up, which is pretty critical.

It’s valuing juicy gossip and hot air over a sincere attempt to figure out how the world works.

Except Noonan’s off-mic quote seems to indicate that nothing about what she writes is sincere; that’s the whole damn point of this post. She is NOT being sincere, which is the problem.

Noonan doesn’t know how this the election is going to turn out, any more than the rest of us. She says this in her Journal article but not in her private comments. So in that sense, her public opinion in the Journal more truthful (though vacuous) than her private opinion, which is basically bullshitting.

I realize that political commentary is largely guesswork and hunches. However, arguing that Noonan should disclose what she *thinks* rather than what she can prove and is prepared to defend means you’ve bought into the system and no longer care what the truth is, just what other people’s opinion of it is. It’s valuing juicy gossip and hot air over a sincere attempt to figure out how the world works.

Uh, I think the point is that her columns would be a lot more insightful if she wrote things she agreed with.

I hear her saying that her words “It’s over” were misunderstood as she was not referring to the McCain campaign. And she gives a legitimate explanation as to why the rest of what she said has not been expressed by her before.

Not that I’m a Noonan fan or anything, but figured a link here would be appropriate.

This open mic story is making the rounds of the blogs because it’s a “smoking gun” for the whorehouse that is mainstream journalism, and not just conservative journalism. But really, compared to what we’ve seen the last few years and even decades, this is trivial. When the Valerie Plame treason was breaking I posted that I felt that the D.C. journalists knew exactly what had happened and that they not only knew the circumstances, but were involved in them. That was especially true for the likes of Judith Miller and Robert Novack. But also, in terms of blunt hypocrisy, the greatly admired and respected Tim Russert. I won’t bother with listing the other top name “journalists” who were fully knowledgeable of the Plame information and yet disclosed absolutely nothing to the public they supposedly are directed towards.

But then that’s the key isn’t it? Noonan’s editors aren’t going to fire her. They’d fire her if she wrote the truth in her columns. Same for the television news people. An NYTimes Judith Miller article on aluminum tubes was specifically referred to by Dick Cheney on one of those Sunday morning news shows which turned out to be a circle jerk of self serving, self reinforcing lies that, though only one of the many gross lies that led to the Iraq War (ABC and ‘Iraqi anthrax’), was an example of the horrific nature American press and media has taken on.

There’s no possible way the likes of George W. Bush could have been elected if not for America’s bought and paid for corrupt press. Gore “lied” about inventing the Internet but “W” was a guy you wanted to have a beer with. Carter had the construction sites with the count of days Americans were held hostage but Reagan was the “teflon” president who may have actually conspired with the Iranian hostage takers to prolong the hostage situation and win the presidency.

Come on. This is your profession. Rosen and Gillmor may try to make gentle waves against the oceanic currents of media corruption but nothing will change unless the corporate monopolies that news organizations have become are broken up. Maybe if there were a thousand TalkingPointsMemos and RawStorys and other news organizations actually interested in getting and publishing the factual news Americans would have a chance at making informed judgments and decisions about the direction of their nation.