From Eric Alterman’s “What Liberal Media?” column in The Nation, 5/23/05:
But Novak pulled out of the debate as soon as he learned he would be going up against Alterman. From the Santa Barbara News-Press, excerpted in the Daily Kos website, http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/5/13/0713/76429:
But that begs the question: Why won’t he debate Alterman? What’s he afraid of?
I’ll come right out and admit that I have little use for Novack, but I think his unwillingness to debate this guy can be attributed in part to our media culture.
Before the 24/7 news cycle, analysts and commentators had some degree of idealogical independence. That meant that they had to spend a great amount of time reading, researching and (gasp) thinking. When they reached a conclusion, it had at least some degree of logic, was consistent with their core beliefs, and could withstand examination in the forum of a debate.
Nowadays, its like these folks (on both sides of the political spectrum) merely wait for their talking points to be faxed to them, then shout these points at the top of their lungs. Self-examination, philosophical consistency and well-thought reasoning simply take to long for these people who have to fill time on the TV and/or radio everyday. In short, many have become lazy, and as such are susceptable to being creamed when forced to defend their positions in an impartial intellectual forum.
Take the “Liberal Media Bias” rigamarole, for instance. I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I can tell when someone is reporting the facts and when someone is pushing an agenda. I’ve been hearing about “Liberal Media Bias” for 20 years, but I’ve never heard a convincing argument that such exists. This “Bias” is merely an unsustainable talking point. But Novack, et al, have been banging this drum for so long that when they are put in the position of having to defend this charge, about all they can do is say “Dan Rather” (who is also pretty useless, in my estimation).
Pardon the hijack, but I like to think it’s no coincidence that Novak outted a CIA operative, and then shortly after “broke his hip in an accident at home”.
I’m sure it is a coincidence, but I still like to think it isn’t.
I hope that UCSB sues him for as much money as it’s allowed to for breach of contract and wins. You’d think he’d have asked “who will I be debating?” when he signed the damned contract (and if they wouldn’t tell him, simply say “I won’t sign til you tell me who”). You have to admit though that it’s rare you find a “journalist” honest enough to say
I would pay good money to see that. Maybe that should be the Great Debate: If they were auctioning off a ticket to see Jon Stewart debate Robert Novak, how much would you pay? Note, the only way to see this debate is if you have a ticket.
She was the commencement speaker at my graduation earlier this month. I thought my mom was gonna pitch a fit when Thomas started talking politics, but I thought it was pretty cool.
What the heck did Alterman say about him, anyway? It’s hard to tell if Novak lacs the sack, or if he hates Alterman so much he can’t be in the same room. Don’t get me wrong; Novak is the crème des douchebags, so I wouldn’t put it past him being a yellow bastard, but it’s really tough to gather what motivated him in this instance.
I seem to remember Al Franken admitting that Rush Limbaugh would clobber him in a debate. So he settled for flaying Limbaugh alive in print.
I admire the ability to handle oneself well in a debate forum, but after hearing politicians scream at each other for years over who is or isn’t “chicken” for not participating in a debate, I don’t place much importance in all the fooferaw.
Since when has Al Franken said Limbaugh would clobber him in a debate? Everything I’ve heard him say would lead me to believe he would never say that, because he doesn’t believe that to be true. Franken has challenged him to a debate which Limbaugh has declined (as has, Bill O’Reilly). Unless you have a cite, I believe you may have your facts mixed up. Besides, Limbaugh would be a terrible debater.
But Novak was confident enough in his own debating skills that he willingly signed up to debate an unspecified party on the issue of liberal or conservative press bias in a highly public setting. He backed out only after he saw Alterman’s name on the roster.
