PDA

View Full Version : $100k Reward offered for full 'Journolist' archive




itshappening
06-29-2010, 01:31 PM
Reward: $100,000 for Full ‘JournoList’ Archive; Source Fully Protected
Posted by Andrew Breitbart Jun 29th 2010 at 9:54 am

I’ve had $100,000 burning in my pocket for the last three months and I’d really like to spend it on a worthy cause. So how about this: in the interests of journalistic transparency, and to offer the American public a unique insight in the workings of the Democrat-Media Complex, I’m offering $100,000 for the full “JournoList” archive, source fully protected. Now there’s an offer somebody can’t refuse.


Yes, the mainstream media that came together to play up the false allegations that the “N-Word” was hurled 15 times by Tea Party participants at the Congressional Black Caucus outside the Capitol the day before the “Obamacare” vote, is the same MSM that colluded to make sure the American public accepted the smear, and refused to show the exculpatory videos that disproved the incendiary charges of Tea Party racism.

Ezra Klein’s “JournoList 400” is the epitome of progressive and liberal collusion that conservatives, Tea Partiers, moderates and many independents have long suspected and feared exists at the heart of contemporary American political journalism. Now that collusion has been exposed when one of the weakest links in that cabal, Dave Weigel, was outed. Weigel was, in all likelihood, exposed because – to whoever the rat was who leaked his emails — he wasn’t liberal enough.

When the “N-word” controversy turned out to be an almost certain falsehood, Weigel had the professional courage to come out against 399 of his “JournoList” peers when he wrote:

I think we’ve seen a paradigm shift, and that the March 20 story will be remembered by conservatives as evidence of how the media accepts attacks on conservatives without due diligence.

Weigel also had the courage to issue a correction and a mea culpa when his reporting was used as a weapon by the unscrupulous Max Blumenthal to falsely smear James O’Keefe as a “racist organizer” of a white nationalist conference. Weigel eventually stepped up and set the record straight when he found out he was falsely named as a witness to the story.

Why was he chosen for outing among 400 “JournoList” participants? I can think of few liberal journalists who have been more fair than Weigel. And if I think that, imagine what true partisans on the left feel about his erratic and ideologically unpredictable output?

Weigel’s career at the Washington Post was assassinated for his crimes against conformity. Try as he might, as a left-leaning journalist he didn’t conform enough. When conservatives jumped on his exposure, he cited defending me as a mitigating alibi. Defending me publicly is a hangable offense in them thar liberal hills!

But Dave Weigel is not the story. The “JournoList” is the story: who was on it and which positions of journalistic power and authority do they hold? Now that the nature and the scope of the list has been exposed, I think the public has a right to know who shapes the big media narratives and how.

Dave Weigel is a portal into the dark world of hardcore liberal bias in the media. This opening gives us a deeper insight into the insidious relationship between liberal think tanks, academics and their mouthpieces in the media.

As we already uncovered in our expose on the “Cry Wolf” project, members of academia and think tanks are actively working to form the narrative used by the press to thwart conservative messages. Like a ventriloquist’s dummy, the reporters on the listserv mimicked the talking points invented and agreed upon by the intellectuals who were invited to the virtual cocktail party that was Klein’s “JournoList.”

And let us not forget the participation of Media Matters in the larger picture of intimidation and mockery for any reporter, like Weigel, who dares stray from the one acceptable liberal narrative in the media. Flying its false flag as a “media watchdog,” the $10 million-or-so per year agitprop command center creates and promotes a system of conformity in which it relentlessly attacks anyone who strays from the Soros-funded party orthodoxy.

The deluge of intimidation showered upon the occasional heretic by Media Matters represent another distinct layer in the media infrastructure that ensures true believer liberals are overrepresented and conservatives had better watch their step.

The fact that 400 journalists did not recognize how wrong their collusion, however informal, was shows an enormous ethical blind spot toward the pretense of impartiality. As journalists actively participated in an online brainstorming session on how best to spin stories in favor of one party against another, they continued to cash their paychecks from their employers under the impression that they would report, not spin the agreed-upon “news” on behalf of their “JournoList” peers.

The American people, at least half of whom are the objects of scorn of this group of 400, deserve to know who was colluding against them so that in the future they can better understand how the once-objective media has come to be so corrupted and despised.

We want the list of journalists that comprised the 400 members of the “JournoList” and we want the contents of the listserv. Why should Weigel be the only person exposed and humiliated?

I therefore offer the sum of $100,000 to the person who provides the full “JournoList” archive. We will protect that person’s privacy and identity forever. No one will ever know who became $100,000 richer – and did the right thing, morally and ethically — by shining the light of truth on this seamy underworld of the media.

$100,000 is not a lot to spend on the Holy Grail of media bias when there is a country to save.

http://bigjournalism.com/abreitbart/2010/06/29/reward-100000-for-full-journolist-archive-source-fully-protected/

MsDoodahs
06-29-2010, 01:35 PM
This could get kinda interesting....

specsaregood
06-29-2010, 01:49 PM
This could get kinda interesting....

Yup. Or as we both said before:


I hope whomever the leak is, backed up the entire archive. I'd be willing to pay for the whole thing to be put up on wikileaks or something like it. I'd love to see what was said during the 2007 campaign season.

Hey Tucker! Publish the entire archive and I'll forgive you for all your past indiscretions!

and


Maybe a book is forthcoming...I would not be shocked to hear it.

It would be an instant best seller and the author would be instantly famous.

;)

I think it is only a matter of time, can you imagine the amount of dirt that archive holds? Whoowee! I'm going on record as predicting that it holds career ending quotes for more than a few "journalists".

specsaregood
06-29-2010, 01:58 PM
I think it is only a matter of time, can you imagine the amount of dirt that archive holds? Whoowee! I'm going on record as predicting that it holds career ending quotes for more than a few "journalists".

Another thought on this. Depending on the content in this archive, could it lead to libel suits? I know it is very difficult to win libel cases if you are a "public" person. BUT if you could prove that journalists knew information was false an still colluded to print the lies I think cases could be made. Hell for that matter....could charges of treason come from knowingly printing lies about public policy?

Stop Making Cents
06-29-2010, 02:10 PM
Wow! Thank God for Andrew Breitbart!

evilfunnystuff
06-29-2010, 03:14 PM
It would be cool if this turns into something

MsDoodahs
06-29-2010, 04:03 PM
Another thought on this. Depending on the content in this archive, could it lead to libel suits? I know it is very difficult to win libel cases if you are a "public" person. BUT if you could prove that journalists knew information was false an still colluded to print the lies I think cases could be made. Hell for that matter....could charges of treason come from knowingly printing lies about public policy?


Hmmm, those are some VERY interesting questions.

I don't think either would happen but I sure as heck DO expect either a book (by whichever of the "journalists" has the biggest set of balls) or, if the money goes up from $100K to some real money amount, Andrew will have an unimaginable coup. I can't imagine any of them turning over the archives for 100K - the offer needs to be more. A LOT more.

itshappening
06-29-2010, 05:30 PM
If you had it would you give it up for $100k? :)

Immortal Technique
06-29-2010, 06:38 PM
brietbart calls himself a Neocon and has attacked libertarian stances in the past
But i support him on this effort

MsDoodahs
06-29-2010, 07:18 PM
If you had it would you give it up for $100k? :)

Honestly, no.

Consider that these are people who potentially will not work again after releasing the archive. I know Andrew says he will forever keep their identity secret, but you know how these things go...SOMEONE will find out who gave it up, and they'll be out of work from then on.

So I think to get one of them to give it up, a higher amount is needed.

libertybrewcity
06-29-2010, 07:25 PM
go brietbart! i feel like it is worth more than 100k though. im willing to bet there are years worth of reading in those archives.

specsaregood
06-29-2010, 07:29 PM
Honestly, no.

I would. :)



Consider that these are people who potentially will not work again after releasing the archive. I know Andrew says he will forever keep their identity secret, but you know how these things go...SOMEONE will find out who gave it up, and they'll be out of work from then on.

I'm not so sure. You could work it through an escrow service and have the escrow service keep the identity anonymous. Hell, treat it like a ransom drop (taxfree!) if one is too paranoid to trust the escrow company. There would be plenty of ways to keep it anonymous if one wants to and of course abides by rule #1.

MsDoodahs
06-29-2010, 07:31 PM
Come on, that archive is a frikken gold mine and everyone knows it.

100K is way too low.

Stop Making Cents
06-29-2010, 07:34 PM
I'm surprised no one's hacked it.

specsaregood
06-29-2010, 08:11 PM
Come on, that archive is a frikken gold mine and everyone knows it.

100K is way too low.

True enough, BUT there are a few hundred members of that email list that had access to that archive. If they just had them all go to the same email account the whole time they have the entire archive saved unless they deleted the emails.

It is only a "gold mine" until just one of those members sells it for the 100k. So do you hold out, hoping for more $$$? Or do you step up and accept the 100k before somebody else does? The journalists don't have a strong bargaining position due to all the competition. In that case 100k is a fair price.

I'd be surprised if somebody hasn't already gone for it.

specsaregood
06-30-2010, 11:12 AM
http://bigjournalism.com/jhoft/2010/06/30/busted-proof-that-far-left-media-hacks-are-colluding-to-spin-national-news-at-journolist/

photo of Dave Weigel:
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/weigel-tea-bag.jpg



But, unfortunately for Mr. Smith and the rest of the 400 far-left JournoList cranks, there’s evidence that this group of prominent leftists work together to organize and promote their agenda in the state-run media. Tom Maguire found one clear example in 2009 of the Journolist members colluding on their talking points.

How great is the JournoList, that off-the-record electronic salon where liberal journalists and policy gurus can exchange views, and which is emphatically *not* an echo chamber?

Let’s see – Matt Yglesias of JL on the AIG furor – it’s a distraction:

But it’s not healthy to just go ’round and ’round in circles over this issue endlessly. If 18 months from now the economy’s still shrinking and unemployment’s at 15 percent, nobody’s going to feel particularly happy about the fact that we stuck it to some scumbags from AIG back in early ‘09.

JL founder Ezra Klein on the AIG furor – its a distraction:

News of Bernanke’s “money from helicopters” maneuver is below the fold on the Wall Street Journal’s front page (though they do have a good roundup of expert reactions elsewhere on the site). Same goes for The Washington Post. Everyone, however, has continuing, above-the-fold coverage of AIG’s bonuses, which are about one-ten thousandth monetary value of the Fed’s move.

Noam Scheiber, JL member, on the AIG furor – it’s a distraction:

I have to say, I’m starting to find the obsessive “what did Geithner/Obama know and when did he know it” line of questioning a little tedious. Yes, it’s worth establishing a rough chronology so we know if public officials are telling us the truth. But the endless preoccupation by my colleagues in the media–when did the Fed tell Treasury, when did Treasury tell Geithner, when did Geithner tell Obama–is getting a little ridiculous. This just wasn’t a huge substantive mistake. It was a small substantive mistake–we’re talking about a tiny fraction of the $200 billion we’re floating AIG here–and a huge political mistake. I’m just not sure how helpful it is to reconstruct the genesis of a political mistake in painstaking detail when we’ve got these huge substantive issues to deal with.

Kevin Drum (gotta be JL) – it’s a distraction:

I don’t, frankly, care all that much about the AIG bonuses. The only reason AIG isn’t in Chapter 11 is technical (they’re too big to fail!), so morally I don’t see any reason not to treat them as if they were in Chapter 11 like any other failed company. That means employees stand in line for their bonuses along with all the other creditors. On the other hand, this whole thing really is small potatoes in the grand scheme of things, and Tim Geithner and the United States Congress have better things to worry about.

And, finally, Ben Smith from The Politico- It’s a distraction:

AIG reality check

The horse has, of course, long left the barn on this, but a trader emails with amazement on the all-consuming AIG bonus story:

The Fed yesterday committed to buy $1.5 trillion in assets, and all that we are talking about today is $146 million in bonuses for traders at AIG. I understand the politics and the optics of the situation but this is getting ridiculous. People need to get some perspective.

Just to do the math, the bonuses are equivaent to .001% of just today’s new government spending.

By Ben Smith 02:32 PM

This is just one example of how far left cranks are colluding to promote the radical the progressive agenda. Obviously, this was not an isolated incident.

If the JournoList archives ever are produced in full it would be the largest media scandal of all time.

MsDoodahs
06-30-2010, 11:37 AM
True enough, BUT there are a few hundred members of that email list that had access to that archive. If they just had them all go to the same email account the whole time they have the entire archive saved unless they deleted the emails.

It is only a "gold mine" until just one of those members sells it for the 100k. So do you hold out, hoping for more $$$? Or do you step up and accept the 100k before somebody else does? The journalists don't have a strong bargaining position due to all the competition. In that case 100k is a fair price.

I'd be surprised if somebody hasn't already gone for it.

hmmmm.

In this light....I'm thinking....maybe $250K?

specsaregood
06-30-2010, 12:31 PM
hmmmm.

In this light....I'm thinking....maybe $250K?

You are a tough bargainer. I think you'd miss out on the payday. What are the chances that just 1 of those few hundred journalists on the list is unemployed, underemployed, in debt or in danger of losing their house to the banksters? All you need is one to be in that situation to guarantee it being sold for 100k.

Like I said, I'd be surprised if it wasn't already in the process of being sold.

MsDoodahs
06-30-2010, 01:57 PM
You are a tough bargainer. I think you'd miss out on the payday. What are the chances that just 1 of those few hundred journalists on the list is unemployed, underemployed, in debt or in danger of losing their house to the banksters? All you need is one to be in that situation to guarantee it being sold for 100k.

Like I said, I'd be surprised if it wasn't already in the process of being sold.

I hope you're right - it will certainly be interesting!